Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

TSRH research shows that bracing IS effective!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TSRH research shows that bracing IS effective!

    I just received the most recent TSRH publication in the mail today.

    I've scanned the newsletter so that you can read this for yourself. The study was published in the June 2010 issue of The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.

    I'm not here to debate this but I hope this offers some hope to parents whose kids are still eligible to be braced. If I'd had this information in my hands while Sheena was still pre-surgery, I would have pursued bracing more aggressively.

    Texas Scottish Rite in Dallas treats thousands of cases of scoliosis a year at no charge and they are heavily involved in research (they discovered the first gene associated with idiopathic scoliosis); in other words, they are a highly trustworthy source for this information.

    Edit: Texas Scottish Rite was just named #2 best Children's orthopedic hospital in the nation.

    http://health.usnews.com/best-hospit...gs/orthopedics
    Last edited by Sherie; 07-16-2010, 10:32 AM.

  • #2
    That sounds hopeful.

    Let's hope this isn't another in-brace study. Another study looking at compliance found much less progression in more compliant kids but it was an in-brace study. They need to follow those kids out past the day after they take the brace off.
    Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

    No island of sanity.

    Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
    Answer: Medicine


    "We are all African."

    Comment


    • #3
      i have the same question that Sharon asked...i'd be curious as to how these kids are doing some years down the road...it would be really good if the same research folks could follow up on this! results showing curve reduction that doesn't disappear with passing years would make this a lot more...impressive!

      jess

      Comment


      • #4
        This is not new knowledge. Here's just one example:

        Full Text

        Sorry, I posted the wrong URL. This is the one that I thought I was posting:

        http://early-onset-scoliosis.com/Doc...Compliance.pdf
        Last edited by LindaRacine; 07-15-2010, 02:24 PM.
        Never argue with an idiot. They always drag you down to their level, and then they beat you with experience. --Twain
        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Surgery 2/10/93 A/P fusion T4-L3
        Surgery 1/20/11 A/P fusion L2-sacrum w/pelvic fixation

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by LindaRacine View Post
          This is not new knowledge. Here's just one example:

          Full Text
          I think that's the article someone posted a while back which turned out to be the last in-brace measurement or something if you can believe it. While that might seem like a very important thing to measure, it is not known how that relates to curve stabilization even a few months out not to mention a few or many years out.

          And I note the ethicists okayed BRAIST after that study. I wonder if this new study will change anything.
          Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

          No island of sanity.

          Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
          Answer: Medicine


          "We are all African."

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by LindaRacine View Post
            This is not new knowledge. Here's just one example:

            Full Text
            This study is not the same. They're only looking at compliance. In the TSRH study, they've actually concluded that compliant bracing has resulted in stopping curve progression.

            Comment


            • #7
              FOR HOW LONG....??? is there a follow up of more than immediate results? that is the question...

              jess

              Comment


              • #8
                Here's the abstract:

                http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20516309

                You can purchase the full study if you really need the details.

                I see some hope here and I would give it a try vs. not doing anything and just allowing nature to take it's course.
                Last edited by Sherie; 07-15-2010, 08:47 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  blood pressure? is that the abstract you meant?

                  jess

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jrnyc View Post
                    FOR HOW LONG....??? is there a follow up of more than immediate results? that is the question...

                    jess
                    I don't have that answer and I'm not going to purchase the complete study to find out but you're more than welcome to.

                    If my kid was eligible to be braced, I would try this rather than waiting for a follow up study of several years. Scoliosis doesn't wait.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by jrnyc View Post
                      blood pressure? is that the abstract you meant?

                      jess
                      whoops, i reposted the link.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        thanks for reposting it...

                        i would conclude nothing from those conclusions without mention of follow up...no one should have to "purchase" a study to find that out! i suspect if not mentioned, it was because there was no follow up!
                        otherwise, they might be shouting results from the rooftops!

                        jess

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jrnyc View Post
                          thanks for reposting it...

                          i would conclude nothing from those conclusions without mention of follow up...no one should have to "purchase" a study to find that out! i suspect if not mentioned, it was because there was no follow up!
                          otherwise, they might be shouting results from the rooftops!

                          jess
                          I think they are basically shouting from the rooftops when they post this in the The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. I believe these are the types of publications our surgeons read when they've looking for new and relevant information. They're not on the internet searching forums and abstracts.

                          I purchased full articles when I was researching for my dd's surgery. If it's that important to you, then it's what you do but since we're way beyond that, I'm not going to bother. All I can say is surgery is not a piece of cake and will have lasting effects for my dd. If there's any hope other than waiting and watching, I would try it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sherie View Post
                            This study is not the same. They're only looking at compliance. In the TSRH study, they've actually concluded that compliant bracing has resulted in stopping curve progression.
                            That group of names looks familiar.

                            I think this is an in-brace study. I hope I'm wrong. I hope someone gets the article. The previous article with similar conclusions by I think this group was in-brace. But it is now a few years on and maybe this is a follow up with those patients a few years out of brace. That would be a very exciting thing and a very important paper!

                            But if it is a new group of patients then the obvious quesiton is why aren't they reporting on the first group? This is the same criticism that can be leveled at Verd Mooney's two torso rotation studies. There was three years between the two studies and rather than present more data on the original set of patients he simply REPUBLISHED the data for that group and added a few new patients. Double publishing data without saying it explicitly and having a damn good reason is not only the fault of the author but of the peer reviewers in my opinion.

                            If this compliance paper is by the same authors who published the earlier article and they simply started a new study with new patients rather than follow on with the first rgoup then that should trigger some questions. Not 100% sure it its the same group but I think it might be.
                            Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

                            No island of sanity.

                            Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
                            Answer: Medicine


                            "We are all African."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Pooka1 View Post
                              That group of names looks familiar.

                              I think this is an in-brace study. I hope I'm wrong. I hope someone gets the article. The previous article with similar conclusions by I think this group was in-brace. But it is now a few years on and maybe this is a follow up with those patients a few years out of brace. That would be a very exciting thing and a very important paper!

                              But if it is a new group of patients then the obvious quesiton is why aren't they reporting on the first group? This is the same criticism that can be leveled at Verd Mooney's two torso rotation studies. There was three years between the two studies and rather than present more data on the original set of patients he simply REPUBLISHED the data for that group and added a few new patients. Double publishing data without saying it explicitly and having a damn good reason is not only the fault of the author but of the peer reviewers in my opinion.

                              If this compliance paper is by the same authors who published the earlier article and they simply started a new study with new patients rather than follow on with the first rgoup then that should trigger some questions. Not 100% sure it its the same group but I think it might be.
                              Sharon

                              I understand your concerns but when you say "I think" then you are making assumptions, this forum has no place for assumptions, right? Then to go on and post results from a previous study that may not have any relevance to this one is somewhat irresponsible. If you know for sure what you're saying is a fact, then please find the study you're referring to and post.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X