Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Response: Implications for night time bracing (problems again with disappearing post)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,164

    Response: Implications for night time bracing (problems again with disappearing post)

    [Linda: well, I seem to be having the same problem I had yesterday with disappearing posts. I took a series of screen shots this time so that you can see what I'm seeing

    Forum list showing thread without the post I had just added - 1:17 (EST) time stamp on discussion
    Open thread showing initial post (timestamp 1:17 EST (time shown in PST once I log in) along with my post
    Forum list now showing my post (still in PST)
    Forum list, now without my post, and the timestamp on the discussion is 1:26 EST (in EST because I've logged out)
    .. Again, sorry for the (repeated) double threads. Once this gets sorted out, I'll go back and delete these duplicate discussions]

    And, the post I was trying to add:

    Is there a reason this discussion about the BrAIST study isn't posted to the end of that discussion?

    On your conclusions: Could you do a few things to make it easier for the rest of us to reach an informed conclusion about this:

    * Provide a link to the graph
    * Define the percentage that you indicate by "vast majority"
    * Define what you mean by "brace needlessly"

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,164
    A few cautions about using the BrAIST study to draw conclusions about nighttime bracing:

    1. The research is not studying nighttime braces. All of the participants have been been prescribed a full time brace. So nothing unique to a nighttime brace (its construction, when it's worn, the type of curves it's prescribed for) are being addressed in this study, and the results of this study cannot, therefore, be generalized to nighttime bracing.

    2. More importantly, the group of kids in this study who wore their brace for significantly less than full time includes children who didn't wear their brace at all. There is no place to look at just the effect of wearing a brace for 7 or 8 hours a night. You can only look at all the children who wrote a full-time brace far less than the prescribed number of hours, all the way down to kids who did not wear it all.

    For these reasons, the BrAIST study is not generalizable to night time bracing. Kids who do not wear a full time brace as prescribed are not the same as kids who wear their nighttime brace as prescribed.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Pooka1 View Post
    That leaves night-time bracing as most of the rest I imagine unless there is some third category of brace. Maybe Providence is a third category but that is also a night-time brace.
    Study protocol:

    Active Comparator: Brace
    This study involves full-time, rigid TLSO's only. Braced subjects are followed every six months with radiography, clinical exam and self-reported evaluations of health and functioning. Orthotic evaluations are conducted every 6 months as as necessary to maintain brace fit and function.

    http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00448448

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •