Success! Down to 24 degrees!

[mamamax]

Would it be possible to move this discussion to some other topic, and give a teenager and her parent some space to celebrate a happy occasion?

I think we should follow this guideline in this thread

[mariaf]

[COLOR="Navy"]Do you really think that they would risk a law suit with false statements regarding who they have trained and to what level? I don't.

I have to disagree.

As I posted on another thread, I have been in the legal field for 30 years. The number of companies with lawsuits against them (whether for making false claims or other reasons) is astronomical. It is something that happens every day. Companies make claims about their product; a consumer feels the claims were misleading or untrue; and a lawsuit is born. Sometimes the consumer wins and is proven right - and sometimes the company wins if there isn't sufficient proof they knowingly lied. Again, I'm not necessarily saying anyone knowingly made false statements in this case (that is yet to be seen); but to say that manufacturers never make false or misleading statements is completely untrue, and to be honest it made me chuckle

[mamamax]

Would it be possible to move this discussion to some other topic, and give a teenager and her parent some space to celebrate a happy occasion?

Excellent suggestion - I hate it when threads get so hijacked - Sorry Mom & Kid15.

[mamamax]

If that were true and relevant, Rivard would have included it in his response. What Spinecor puts on their web site and NOT in a Letter to the editor where the people who read the original Wong article will see it is irrelevant and pouty.

If it turns out that these three people with the training certificates in Spinecor were told they were able to fit the brace without supervision, you realize this will be the nail in the coffin of Spinecor's credibility, yes? I will try to find Wong's extended response... I think he might address this exact point.

I will take the official word from the manufacturer (which comes after the exchanges between Rivard and Wong) over all else - why: they are responsible for the training. Do you really think that they would risk a law suit with false statements regarding who they have trained and to what level? I don't. The absence of ANY certified providers in Hong Kong is also rather telling.

[Pooka1]

And the Spinecor manufacturer's rebuttal follows all of this - and is posted on their website. Where they state:


None of the authors of this paper are certified in SpineCor treatment nor have they ever received significant training in the SpineCor system. Some of the technicians working with these authors at the scoliosis clinic in Hong Kong have received basic introductory training, but they are not certified SpineCor providers and are not considered to have received training to a sufficient standard to use the SpineCor system without supervision.

If that were true and relevant, Rivard would have included it in his response. What Spinecor puts on their web site and NOT in a Letter to the editor where the people who read the original Wong article will see it is irrelevant and pouty.

If it turns out that these three people with the training certificates in Spinecor were told they were able to fit the brace without supervision, you realize this will be the nail in the coffin of Spinecor's credibility, yes? I will try to find Wong's extended response... I think he might address this exact point.

[mamamax]

On the site I posted, Rivard is responding to the Wong article and Wong is responding to Rivard's response. It is impossible to say otherwise.

Elsewhere, Wong goes on at greater length in his rebuttal of Rivard's comments on his article.

And the Spinecor manufacturer's rebuttal follows all of this - and is posted on their website. Where they state:


None of the authors of this paper are certified in SpineCor treatment nor have they ever received significant training in the SpineCor system. Some of the technicians working with these authors at the scoliosis clinic in Hong Kong have received basic introductory training, but they are not certified SpineCor providers and are not considered to have received training to a sufficient standard to use the SpineCor system without supervision.

[mamamax]

I thought you referred to the chiro as your "orthopedic specialist." I assumed if you were referring to your orthopedic surgeon you would have said surgeon.

To be clear why don't you just say "surgeon" or "chiro?"

You simply made a wrong assumption - I will (and have always for sake of clarity) refer to my chiropractor as chiropractor (or sometimes I may say Spinecor provider) - and orthopedic specialist as, orthopedic specialist.

[Pooka1]

No Sharon - I wrote: orthopedic specialist ... you know - the one I include in my treatment plan - the MD/surgeon who includes my chiropractor in my treatment. Boy - how many times to I have to say that?

I thought you referred to the chiro as your "orthopedic specialist." I assumed if you were referring to your orthopedic surgeon you would have said surgeon.

To be clear why don't you just say "surgeon" or "chiro?"

[Pooka1]

Check the dates - I believe the Wong's rebuttal comes first - Spinecor's comes second

On the site I posted, Rivard is responding to the Wong article and Wong is responding to Rivard's response. It is impossible to say otherwise.

Elsewhere, Wong goes on at greater length in his rebuttal of Rivard's comments on his article.

[mamamax]

You're asking a chiro that? Can you also ask a surgeon who has decided against using Spinecor that also please?

I am writing down the answer and mailing it to myself...

No Sharon - I wrote: orthopedic specialist ... you know - the one I include in my treatment plan - the MD/surgeon who includes my chiropractor in my treatment. Boy - how many times to I have to say that?

[mamamax]

http://early-onset-scoliosis.com/Doc...ng%20Study.pdf

This is an abbreviated version of Wong's response. He responded at greater length somewhere else but I haven't found it yet. The extended response was posted on SSO I think.

Anyway, three of the Hong Kong study team were in fact certified to use Spinecor in direct contradiction to what Rivard said.

I think Weiss has also said he or his people were also qualified/certified but I don't recall that clearly.

And the Montreal guys are still winging this as I type. The are making this up as they go along and changing things when like good researchers. There is no "standard protocol" known to work; There is only the experimental protocol that they are standardizing on to see where it goes. This is a critical difference that I think people gloss over.

I suspect every brace inventor (and their company) will always claim that an independent researcher is somehow not doing it right if the results are not positive. At some point, it just becomes ridiculous.

Check the dates - I believe the Wong's rebuttal comes first - Spinecor's comes second

[Pooka1]

I'm seeing my orthopedic specialist next week - think I will ask his opinion on why US surgeons do not consider this

You're asking a chiro that? Can you also ask a surgeon who has decided against using Spinecor that also please?

I am writing down the answer and mailing it to myself...

[Pooka1]

Wong on Rivard on Wong

http://early-onset-scoliosis.com/Doc...ng%20Study.pdf

This is an abbreviated version of Wong's response. He responded at greater length somewhere else but I haven't found it yet. The extended response was posted on SSO I think.

Anyway, three of the Hong Kong study team were in fact certified to use Spinecor in direct contradiction to what Rivard said.

I think Weiss has also said he or his people were also qualified/certified but I don't recall that clearly.

And the Montreal guys are still winging this as I type. The are making this up as they go along and changing things when like good researchers. There is no "standard protocol" known to work; There is only the experimental protocol that they are standardizing on to see where it goes. This is a critical difference that I think people gloss over.

I suspect every brace inventor (and their company) will always claim that an independent researcher is somehow not doing it right if the results are not positive. At some point, it just becomes ridiculous.

[mamamax]

Spinecor Rebuttal to the Wong Rebuttal

I would like to share some important information regarding why some cannot duplicate the same results as Rivard and Colliard (and others) regarding Spinecor. The following are the introductory comments published by Spinecor regarding the Wong study. Mind you - such professionals do not publish false statement because of a little thing called - law suits. And I have noticed no one is suing the Spinecor manufacturer ;-) Full text (providing in-depth details) is available at the manufacturer's web site.

It has come to our attention that an article entitled “The effect of rigid versus flexible spinal orthosis on the clinical efficacy and acceptance of the patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis” was published in the May 2008 issue of Spine Journal.[1] The SpineCorporation is the company responsible for production, supply, and training in the use of the SpineCor treatment system and we have serious concerns about the methods and validity of this study. We would like to point out two serious issues in the way in which this study was conducted and we believe these factors invalidate the data of the SpineCor treatment group and therefore the comparative results of the study.

1) The authors in this study and the facility at which patients were treated with SpineCor are not qualified to a proficient standard in the SpineCor treatment system. They should not be providing this treatment therapeutically to patients, let alone conducting research into its efficacy. We believe this to be seriously unethical and detrimental to the patients involved.

2) This treatment centre has not been supplied with enough initial SpineCor components to effectively brace 22 patients. They also have not received enough replacement components necessary to effectively maintain this amount of SpineCor braces. In reference to point 1, the SpineCor brace is a unique treatment system for idiopathic scoliosis that is unlike any other type of spinal orthosis ever developed[2]. It does not share the same treatment principles of 3-point pressure that rigid orthoses use and its use requires specific and extensive training. Training and an expertise in rigid bracing does not transfer to SpineCor; specific training and qualification is necessary. To attain the necessary skills to be a safe and effective SpineCor provider, candidates are required to attend an initial Phase 1 theory course. On completion of Phase 1, providers are eligible to complete a Phase 2 practical training which involves treating patients in front of a qualified SpineCor trainer. Distributors of the SpineCor brace are under a contractual obligation only to supply SpineCor braces and components to Phase 2 certified providers. To remain certified, practitioners must see a minimum number of patients using this system each year or recertification is necessary[3]. These strict systems are in place to ensure quality of treatment and consistency of results.

None of the authors of this paper are certified in SpineCor treatment nor have they ever received significant training in the SpineCor system. Some of the technicians working with these authors at the scoliosis clinic in Hong Kong have received basic introductory training, but they are not certified SpineCor providers and are not considered to have received training to a sufficient standard to use the SpineCor system without supervision.

[mamamax]

The surgeons that I've dealt with would not be fitting Spinecor braces for their patients because they have orthotists who would do that for them. So, I don't see the time thing as a valid argument.

--Linda

Linda is absolutely correct - in the US it would be standard practice for a surgeon to refer a patient to an orthotist for bracing treatment. There are orthotists in the US that are Spinecor certified and they are listed on the manufacturer's web site. This is not to say however, that US surgeons could not apply the technique (as the Canadian surgeons do). I'm seeing my orthopedic specialist next week - think I will ask his opinion on why US surgeons do not consider this - outside the obvious US protocol that has been in place in the past.