It seemed to me that the initial focus of the thread was just that, should it be the sole diagnostic criteria for kids with low scores and no other risk factors--meaning straight- up AIS. Low score = no brace. I personally don't think it's that simple but I thought that was the initial suggestion posed. I would not think the manufacturer would suggest in their literature that it should be the sole diagnostic tool as that would just open them up to lawsuits.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The ethics of bracing (and PT) with a Scoliscore <41
Collapse
X
-
mamandcrm
G diagnosed 6/08 at almost 7 with 25*
Providence night brace, increased to 35*
Rigo-Cheneau brace full-time 12/08-4/10
14* at 10/09 OOB x-ray
11* at 4/10 OOB x-ray
Wearing R-C part-time since 4/10
latest OOB xray 5/14 13*
currently going on 13 yrs old
I no longer participate in this forum though I will update signature from time to time with status
-
Bracing and the scolioscore
I guess I had glossed over the fact that this was a retrospective study.
Given that, I can't see how they could have controlled for the effects of bracing. Either:
1) They picked children, even children with large curves, who had never been braced (which would have to be a less than random sampling of the available curves)
or
2) They included children who had been braced (which would be assumed to change their final curve.)
Is there some third choice I'm not seeing?
Comment
-
Originally posted by mamandcrm View PostIt seemed to me that the initial focus of the thread was just that, should it be the sole diagnostic criteria for kids with low scores and no other risk factors--meaning straight- up AIS. Low score = no brace. I personally don't think it's that simple but I thought that was the initial suggestion posed. I would not think the manufacturer would suggest in their literature that it should be the sole diagnostic tool as that would just open them up to lawsuits.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hdugger View PostActually, I just looked at the Lonner video, and he doesn't say that he took a child out of the brace based on the scolioscore. He says that he looked at a whole set of factors, and based on all of those factors, he made the decision.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
-
Okay I watched the video. That girl has multiple family members on BOTH sides of the family affected by scoliosis and Lonner took her out of the brace.
My question then becomes who does he leave in a brace with a score of 16 if not her? I wonder if it is anyone at all.
He did say he relied on other factors but I would like to know what they are in this case. Either Scoliscore has a 100% prediction rate for AIS girls with small curves in the calibration set or it doesn't.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
-
Originally posted by hdugger View PostActually, I just looked at the Lonner video, and he doesn't say that he took a child out of the brace based on the scolioscore. He says that he looked at a whole set of factors, and based on all of those factors, he made the decision.
If scoliscore wasn't the reason he took that girl out of brace then the actual reason is not obvious from that video despite what he said.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
-
I'm guessing their hedging their bets until the *real* results of the scolioscore test - how it predicts curves going forward - are in. (See my notes above about bracing for one of many reasons why these results can't possibly be 100% solid for any score.)
That's supported by another quote I saw from him saying a child with a low score could have xrays "every 8 to 12 months instead of every 3 to 6 months."
I wonder if it's made clear to parents that their low scoring child's curve could increase 20 degrees (given that they came in with a 20 degree curve) and still be considered a complete success.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hdugger View PostI guess I had glossed over the fact that this was a retrospective study.
Given that, I can't see how they could have controlled for the effects of bracing. Either:
1) They picked children, even children with large curves, who had never been braced (which would have to be a less than random sampling of the available curves)
or
2) They included children who had been braced (which would be assumed to change their final curve.)
Is there some third choice I'm not seeing?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pooka1 View Post
He did say he relied on other factors but I would like to know what they are in this case. Either Scoliscore has a 100% prediction rate for AIS girls with small curves in the calibration set or it doesn't.
In the validation tests, group 1 had 0 severe curves with an AIS-PT <41. Groups 2 and 3 had a total of 5 with a severe curve and an AIS-PT <41.
You are wondering if the scoliscore has a 100% accuracy/prediction rate for small curves, but that's not what the study was about.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hdugger View PostI'm guessing their hedging their bets until the *real* results of the scolioscore test - how it predicts curves going forward - are in. (See my notes above about bracing for one of many reasons why these results can't possibly be 100% solid for any score.)
That's supported by another quote I saw from him saying a child with a low score could have xrays "every 8 to 12 months instead of every 3 to 6 months."
I wonder if it's made clear to parents that their low scoring child's curve could increase 20 degrees (given that they came in with a 20 degree curve) and still be considered a complete success.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
-
Originally posted by skevimc View PostIt doesn't. Assuming I understand what you're asking or saying. The three cohorts they used to test/validate the AIS-PT were selected in order to model the standard populations. 1. those referred to the doctor by in-school screening. 2. those who are seen in an active spine surgery clinic. 3. Same as #2 but with males instead of females.
In the validation tests, group 1 had 0 severe curves with an AIS-PT <41. Groups 2 and 3 had a total of 5 with a severe curve and an AIS-PT <41.
You are wondering if the scoliscore has a 100% accuracy/prediction rate for small curves, but that's not what the study was about.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
-
Originally posted by skevimc View PostThe genetic markers they are looking at/for are stable and thus bracing or any other type of treatment would not change over time.
That is, the braced 35 degree child, if unbraced, might have ended up with a 50 degree curve, and thus would not be included with the low-risk group.
Am I missing something here?
Comment
-
Originally posted by hdugger View PostI didn't mean that the markers would change with bracing, but rather that a braced child with a 35 degree curve and an unbraced child with a 35 degree curve would end up in same low risk pool when studied retrospectively, but they might have a very unequal risk when studied prospectively with bracing controlled for.
That is, the braced 35 degree child, if unbraced, might have ended up with a 50 degree curve, and thus would not be included with the low-risk group.
Am I missing something here?
(off to re-check that English is my first language...)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
Comment