Dataset Information

Design of the Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST).

ABSTRACT: Descriptive.To describe the design and development of Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST).Bracing has remained the standard of care for the nonoperative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis since the introduction of the Milwaukee brace in the late 1940s, but it has never been subjected to a rigorous evaluation of either its efficacy or its effectiveness. The BrAIST was designed to address the primary question: Do braces (specifically a thoracolumbosacral orthosis) lower the risk of curve progression to a surgical threshold (?50°) in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis relative to watchful waiting alone?The authors describe the rationale for BrAIST, including the limitations of the current literature evaluating bracing for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Second, the authors describe the preliminary work, including the preparation of the National Institutes of Health clinical trials planning grant. Finally, the authors describe the trial design in detail.BrAIST was conducted in 25 sites in North America. Subjects were treated either with a thoracolumbosacral orthosis or watchful waiting and followed every 6 months until they reached skeletal maturity or the surgical threshold of 50° Cobb angle.Clinical decision making will be improved by translation of the BrAIST results into evidence-based prognosis and estimates of how the prognosis, specifically the risk of progressing to surgery, may be altered by the use of bracing.N/A.

SUBMITTER: Weinstein SL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4536980 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Design of the Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST).

Weinstein Stuart L SL Dolan Lori A LA Wright James G JG Dobbs Matthew B MB

Spine 20131001 21

<h4>Study design</h4>Descriptive.<h4>Objective</h4>To describe the design and development of Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST).<h4>Summary of background data</h4>Bracing has remained the standard of care for the nonoperative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis since the introduction of the Milwaukee brace in the late 1940s, but it has never been subjected to a rigorous evaluation of either its efficacy or its effectiveness. The BrAIST was designed to address the ...[more]

PMID: 24026162

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceModerate-grade adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) may be treated with full-time bracing. For patients who reject full-time bracing, the effects of alternative, conservative interventions are unknown.ObjectiveTo determine whether self-mediated physical activity combined with either nighttime bracing (NB) or scoliosis-specific exercise (SSE) is superior to a control of physical activity alone (PA) in preventing Cobb angle progression in moderate-grade AIS.Design, setting, and participantsThe Conservative Treatment for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (CONTRAIS) randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 10, 2013, through October 23, 2018, in 6 public hospitals across Sweden. Male and female children and adolescents aged 9 to 17 years with an AIS primary curve Cobb angle of 25° to 40°, apex T7 or caudal, and skeletal immaturity based on estimated remaining growth of at least 1 year were included in the study. Dates of analysis were from October 25, 2021, to January 28, 2023.InterventionsInterventions included self-mediated physical activity in combination with either NB or SSE or PA (control). Patients with treatment failure were given the option to transition to a full-time brace until skeletal maturity.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was curve progression of 6° or less (treatment success) or curve progression of more than 6° (treatment failure) seen on 2 consecutive posteroanterior standing radiographs compared with the inclusion radiograph before skeletal maturity. A secondary outcome of curve progression was the number of patients undergoing surgery up until 2 years after the primary outcome.ResultsThe CONTRAIS study included 135 patients (45 in each of the 3 groups) with a mean (SD) age of 12.7 (1.4) years; 111 (82%) were female. Treatment success was seen in 34 of 45 patients (76%) in the NB group and in 24 of 45 patients (53%) in the PA group (odds ratio [OR], 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1-6.6). The number needed to treat to prevent curve progression with NB was 4.5 (95% CI, 2.4-33.5). Treatment success occurred in 26 of 45 patients (58%) in the SSE group (OR for SE vs PA, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.5-2.8). Up to 2 years after the primary outcome time point, 9 patients in each of the 3 groups underwent surgery.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, treatment with NB prevented curve progression of more than 6° to a significantly higher extent than did PA, while SSE did not; in addition, allowing transition to full-time bracing after treatment failure resulted in similar surgical frequencies independent of initial treatment. These results suggest that NB may be an effective alternative intervention in patients rejecting full-time bracing.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01761305.

Project description:ObjectiveTo analyze the correlation between the polymorphism on interleukin 6 (IL-6) gene promoter region-174 locus and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), including the susceptibility, the bracing effectiveness, and the possible mechanism.MethodsThe 182 AIS patients and 210 healthy controls who met the inclusion criteria between January 2013 and January 2016 were collected as research objects. The genotype of IL-6 gene promoter region-174 locus, the serum IL-6, the bone mineral density (BMD) of femoral neck and vertebrae (L 1-4), and the bone metabolism parameters, including bone alkaline phosphatase (BALP), bone gla protein (BGP), tartrate resistant acid phosphatase 5b (TRACP-5b), urine Ca, and urine Ca/Cr, were detected. All research objects were divided into the AIS group and the control group according to whether they had AIS, the GG, CG, CC groups according to their genotype, and progression-free group and progression group according to the therapeutic effectiveness of 1-year bracing treatment. Statistical analysis for the indexes were conducted respectively.ResultsThere were significant differences in AIS history, BMD of femoral neck and lumbar vertebrae between the AIS group and control group ( P<0.05). According to the therapeutic effecitveness of 1-year bracing treatment, 182 AIS patients were divided into progression-free group in 110 cases and progression group in 72 cases. The results of single factor analysis showed that there were significant differences in the genotype and allele distribution of IL-6 gene promoter region-174 locus, BMD of femoral neck and lumbar vertebrae, IL-6, TRACP-5b, urine Ca, and urine Ca/Cr between the progression-free group and progression group ( P<0.05). The results of multivariable analysis showed that the BMD of lumbar vertebrae, TRACP-5b, and urine Ca were the influencing factors of bracing efficacy ( P<0.05). According to the results of genotype detection, all research objects were divided into GG group in 264 cases, CG group in 104 cases, and CC group in 24 cases. The IL-6, TRACP-5b, urine Ca, and urine Ca/Cr of GG type carriers were higher and BMD of femoral neck and lumbar vertebrae were lower when compared with the CG and CC type carriers ( P<0.05). The BMD of lumbar vertebrae of CG type carriers was lower than that of CC type carriers ( P<0.05).ConclusionThe polymorphism of IL-6 genepromoter region-174 locus wasn't correlated with the AIS susceptibility, but it was correlated (not independently correlated) with the scoliosis progression under bracing treatment, and the risk for G-carried patients was higher. The mechanism may be that the polymorphism affected the IL-6 expression level and eventually affected the BMD of AIS patients through the bone metabolism.

Project description:STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: (1) Does brace treatment compared with observation of curves lead to lower rates of surgery and failure for patients with idiopathic scoliosis? (2) Does brace treatment compared with observation of curves lead to better quality of life outcomes for patients with idiopathic scoliosis? (3) Does brace treatment compared with observation of curves lead to improved curve angle for patients with idiopathic scoliosis? METHODS: A systematic review of the English-language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1970 and December 2010. Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched to identify studies comparing brace treatment with observation of curves in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Two independent reviewers assessed the strength of evidence using the GRADE criteria assessing quality, quantity, and consistency of results. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: We identified eight studies meeting our inclusion criteria. The pooled studies comparing surgical rates between observation and brace treatment showed no statistical significance (P = .65). One study showed a statistically significant difference in failure rate between observation (45%) and brace (15%) treatment (P < .001). Findings with respect to posttreatment quality of life at 2 years were inconsistent. Two studies favored the brace group, and one the observation group using the SRS-22 and Quality of Life Profile for Spine Deformities (QLPSD) measures. Two of three studies reporting pretreatment and posttreatment curve angles demonstrated a treatment effect favoring bracing; however, statistical significance for these treatment effects could not be calculated. One study described a treatment effect favoring observation but the differences were not statistically significant (P = .26). CONCLUSION: This systematic review identified and summarized only the highest level of evidence by limiting to comparison studies. Case-series were not included. This allowed for comparisons among the same patient populations. Findings with respect to surgical rates, quality of life, and change in curve angle demonstrate either no significant differences or inconsistent findings favoring one treatment or the other. If bracing does not cause a positive treatment effect, then its rejection will lead to significant savings for healthcare providers and purchasers. Given the very low to low level of evidence and inconsistent findings, a randomized trial is necessary to determine if bracing should be recommended.

Dataset Information

Design of the Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST).

Publications

Design of the Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets