Effect of adding Schroth physiotherapeutic scoliosis specific exercises to standard care in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis on posture assessed using surface topography: A secondary analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT).

BACKGROUND: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a three-dimensional structural asymmetry of the spine and trunk affecting 2-4% of adolescents. Standard treatment is observation, bracing, and surgery for small, moderate, and large curves, respectively. Schroth exercises aim to correct posture and reduce curve progression. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the effect of Schroth exercises added to the standard care compared to standard care alone on torso asymmetry in AIS. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial (NCT01610908), 124 participants with AIS (age: 10-18, Cobb: 10°-45°, Risser: ≤3) were randomly assigned to the control (Standard care only) or Schroth (Standard care + Schroth treatment) group. Schroth treatment consisted of 1-hour weekly supervised sessions and 30-45 minutes of daily home exercises for six months. The control group received Schroth exercises in the last six months of the 1-year monitoring period. Markerless 3D surface topography assessed torso asymmetry measured by maximum deviation (MaxDev) and root mean square (RMS). Intention to treat linear mixed effects model analysis was compared to the per protocol analysis. RESULTS: In the intention to treat analysis, the Schroth group (n = 63) had significantly larger decreased RMS (-1.2 mm, 95%CI [-1.5,-0.9]mm, p = 0.012) and MaxDev (-1.9mm, 95%CI [-2.4,-1.5]mm, p = 0.025) measurements compared to controls (n = 57) after six months of intervention. In the per protocol analysis (Schroth n = 39, control n = 36), the Schroth group also had a significantly larger decrease compared to the control in both the RMS (-1.0mm, 95%CI [-1.9, -0.2]mm, p = 0.013) and MaxDev measurements (-2.0mm, 95%CI [-3.3,-0.5]mm, p = 0.037). For the control group, both the intention to treat and per protocol analysis showed no difference in RMS and MaxDev in the last six months of Schroth intervention (p>0.5). CONCLUSION: Schroth Exercise treatment added to standard care (observation or bracing) reduced asymmetry measurements in AIS. As expected, a greater effect was observed for participants who followed the prescribed exercise treatment per protocol.

Schroth Physiotherapeutic Scoliosis-Specific Exercise (PSSE) Trials-Systematic Review of Methods and Recommendations for Future Research.

The Schroth method is a non-operative treatment for scoliosis and kyphosis, used standalone or as an adjunct to bracing. While supporting evidence for its effectiveness is emerging, methodologic standardization and rigor are equivocal. Thus, we aimed to systematically review methods of published Schroth physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercise (PSSE) trials and provide guidance for future research. We searched six databases for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) investigating the effect of Schroth in children and adults with scoliosis or kyphosis. General characteristics, methodological approaches, treatment protocols, and outcomes reporting were analyzed. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using an adapted Cochrane RoB2 tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I for NRSI. Eligible studies (n = 7) were conducted in six countries and included patients with Scheuermann's kyphosis (n = 1) and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (n = 6). Though all seven studies used the term Schroth to describe their interventions, the Schroth method was used in four of seven studies, of which only one used Schroth classification, three used Schroth therapists, and none prospectively registered the study protocol. Overall, methodological rigor was suboptimal, potentially invalidating evidence synthesis. Authors should follow minimum standards for reporting, including prospectively registering detailed protocols; using appropriate exercise labeling, Schroth classification and certified therapists; naming and describing exercises per classification; and providing therapy dosages, prescription methods, and adherence.

Algorithm for Schroth-Curve-Type Classification of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: An Intra- and Inter-Rater Reliability Study.

Schroth exercises for scoliosis are prescribed based on curve types. This study aimed to determine the reliability of an algorithm for classifying Schroth curve types. Forty-four consecutive volunteers with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, 10 to 18 years old, with curves 10° to 50°, were recruited from a scoliosis clinic. Their standing posture and Adam's bending test were videotaped. Ten consecutive Schroth therapist volunteers from an international registry independently classified the curve types using the proposed classification algorithm. Videos were rated twice at least seven days apart. Reliability was calculated using the Gwet's AC1 agreement coefficient for all the raters and for subgroups reporting full understanding (well-trained) and with prior algorithm experience. The intra-rater and weighted agreement coefficients for all the raters were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.53-0.73) and 0.75 (0.63-0.84), respectively. For the well-trained raters, they were 0.70 (0.60-0.78) and 0.82 (0.73-0.88), respectively; for the experienced raters, they were 0.81 (0.77-0.85) and 0.89 (0.80-0.94), respectively. The inter-rater versus weighted agreement coefficients for all the raters were 0.43 (0.28-0.58) versus 0.48 (0.29-0.67). For the well-trained raters, they were 0.50 (0.38-0.61) versus 0.61 (0.49-0.72), and for the experienced raters, they were 0.67 (0.50-0.85) versus 0.79 (0.64-0.94). Full understanding and experience led to higher reliability. Use of the algorithm can help standardize Schroth exercise treatment.

Inventory of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used in the Non-Operative Care of Scoliosis: A Scoping Review.

It is unclear which patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can assess non-operative care for scoliosis. Most existing tools aim to assess the effects of surgery. This scoping review aimed to inventory the PROMs used to assess non-operative scoliosis treatment by population and languages. We searched Medline (OVID) as per COSMIN guidelines. Studies were included if patients were diagnosed with idiopathic scoliosis or adult degenerative scoliosis and used PROMs. Studies without quantitative data or reporting on fewer than 10 participants were excluded. Nine reviewers extracted the PROMs used, the population(s), language(s), and study setting(s). We screened 3724 titles and abstracts. Of these, the full texts of 900 articles were assessed. Data were extracted from 488 studies, in which 145 PROMs were identified across 22 languages and 5 populations (Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis, Adult Degenerative Scoliosis, Adult Idiopathic Scoliosis, Adult Spine Deformity, and an Unclear category). Overall, the most used PROMs were the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 37.3%), Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22, 34.8%), and the Short Form-36 (SF-36, 20.1%), but the frequency varied by population. It is now necessary to determine the PROMs that demonstrate the best measurement properties in the non-operative treatment of scoliosis to include in a core set of outcomes.

Patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis perceive positive improvements regardless of change in the Cobb angle - Results from a randomized controlled trial comparing a 6-month Schroth intervention added to standard care and standard care alone. SOSORT 2018 Award winner.

BACKGROUND: The Cobb angle is proposed as the "disease process" outcome for scoliosis research because therapies aim to correct or stop curve progression. While the Scoliosis Research Society recommends the Cobb angle as the primary outcome, the Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment prioritises, as a general goal, patient related outcomes over Cobb angle progression. OBJECTIVE: To determine the threshold of change in the Cobb angle in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who perceive improvement in a 6-months randomized controlled trial comparing a Schroth exercise intervention added to the standard of care to the standard of care alone. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial of 50 patients with AIS, with curves ranging from 10° to 45°, with or without a brace. Participants with diagnoses other than AIS, surgical candidates or patients who had scoliosis surgery were excluded. The 6-month interventions consisted of Schroth exercises added to standard-of-care (observation or bracing) with daily home exercises and weekly therapy sessions (Schroth) or standard-of-care alone (Control). The anchor method for estimating the minimal important difference (MID) in the largest Cobb angles (LC) was used. Patient-reported change in back status over the 6-month treatment period was measured using the Global Rating of Change (GRC) scale as anchor varying from - 7 ("great deal worse") to + 7 ("great deal better"). Participants were divided into two groups based on GRC scores: Improved (GRC ≥2) or Stable/Not Improved (GRC ≤1). MID was defined as the change in the LC that most accurately predicted the GRC classification as per the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). RESULTS: The average age was 13.4 ± 1.6 years and the average LC was 28.5 ± 8.8 °s. The average GRC in the control group was - 0.1 ± 1.6, compared to + 4.4 ± 2.2 in the Schroth group. The correlation between LC and GRC was adequate (r = - 0.34, p < 0.05). The MID for the LC was 1.0 °. The area under the ROC was 0.69 (0.52-0.86), suggesting a 70% chance to properly classify a patient as perceiving No Improvement/Stable or Improvement based on the change in the LC. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing Schroth treatment perceived improved status of their backs even if the Cobb angle did not improve beyond the conventionally accepted threshold of 5°. Standard of care aims to slow/stop progression while Schroth exercises aim to improve postural balance, signs and symptoms of scoliosis. Given the very small MID, perceived improvement in back status is likely due to something other than the Cobb angle. This study warrants investigating alternatives to the Cobb angle that might be more relevant to patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01610908 . Retrospectively registered on April 2, 2012 (first posted on June 4, 2012 - https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/keydates/NCT01610908 ).

2016 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth.

BACKGROUND: The International Scientific Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) produced its first guidelines in 2005 and renewed them in 2011. Recently published high-quality clinical trials on the effect of conservative treatment approaches (braces and exercises) for idiopathic scoliosis prompted us to update the last guidelines' version. The objective was to align the guidelines with the new scientific evidence to assure faster knowledge transfer into clinical practice of conservative treatment for idiopathic scoliosis (CTIS). METHODS: Physicians, researchers and allied health practitioners working in the area of CTIS were involved in the development of the 2016 guidelines. Multiple literature reviews reviewing the evidence on CTIS (assessment, bracing, physiotherapy, physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) and other CTIS) were conducted. Documents, recommendations and practical approach flow charts were developed using a Delphi procedure. The process was completed with the Consensus Session held during the first combined SOSORT/IRSSD Meeting held in Banff, Canada, in May 2016. RESULTS: The contents of the new 2016 guidelines include the following: background on idiopathic scoliosis, description of CTIS approaches for various populations with flow-charts for clinical practice, as well as literature reviews and recommendations on assessment, bracing, PSSE and other CTIS. The present guidelines include a total of 68 recommendations divided into following topics: bracing (n = 25), PSSE to prevent scoliosis progression during growth (n = 12), PSSE during brace treatment and surgical therapy (n = 6), other conservative treatments (n = 2), respiratory function and exercises (n = 3), general sport activities (n = 6); and assessment (n = 14). According to the agreed strength and level of evidence rating scale, there were 2 recommendations on bracing and 1 recommendation on PSSE that reached level of recommendation "I" and level of evidence "II". Three recommendations reached strength of recommendation A based on the level of evidence I (2 for bracing and one for assessment); 39 recommendations reached strength of recommendation B (20 for bracing, 13 for PSSE, and 6 for assessment).The number of paper for each level of evidence for each treatment is shown in Table 8. CONCLUSION: The 2016 SOSORT guidelines were developed based on the current evidence on CTIS. Over the last 5 years, high-quality evidence has started to emerge, particularly in the areas of efficacy of bracing (one large multicentre trial) and PSSE (three single-centre randomized controlled trials). Several grade A recommendations were presented. Despite the growing high-quality evidence, the heterogeneity of the study protocols limits generalizability of the recommendations. There is a need for standardization of research methods of conservative treatment effectiveness, as recognized by SOSORT and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) non-operative management Committee.

Schroth physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: how many patients require treatment to prevent one deterioration? - results from a randomized controlled trial - "SOSORT 2017 Award Winner".

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) support using physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). All RCTs reported statistically significant results favouring PSSE but none reported on clinical significance. The number needed to treat (NNT) helps determine if RCT results are clinically meaningful. The NNT is the number of patients that need to be treated to prevent one bad outcome in a given period. A low NNT suggests that a therapy has positive outcomes in most patients offered the therapy. The objective was to determine how many patients require Schroth PSSE added to standard care (observation or brace treatment) to prevent one progression (NNT) of the Largest Curve (LC) or Sum of Curves (SOC) beyond 5° and 10°, respectively over a 6-month interval. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a RCT. Fifty consecutive participants from a scoliosis clinic were randomized to the Schroth PSSE + standard of care group (n = 25) or the standard of care group (n = 25).We included males and females with AIS, age 10-18 years, all curve types, with curves 10°- 45°, with or without brace, and all maturity levels. We excluded patients awaiting surgery, having had surgery, having completed brace treatment and with other scoliosis diagnoses. The local ethics review board approved the study (Pro00011552).The Schroth intervention consisted of weekly 1-h supervised Schroth PSSE sessions and a daily home program delivered over six months in addition to the standard of care. A prescription algorithm was used to determine which exercises patients were to perform. Controls received only standard of care.Cobb angles were measured using a semi-automatic system from posterior-anterior standing radiographs at baseline and 6 months.We calculated absolute risk reduction (ARR) and relative risk reduction (RRR). The NTT was calculated as: NNT = 1/ARR. Patients with missing values (PSSE group; n = 2 and controls; n = 4) were assumed to have had curve progression (worst case scenario). The RRR is calculated as RRR = ARR/CER. RESULTS: For LC, NNT = 3.6 (95% CI 2.0-28.2), and for SOC, NNT = 3.1 (95% CI 1.9-14.2). The corresponding ARR was 28% for LC and 32% for the SOC. The RRR was 70% for LC and 73% for the SOC. Patients with complete follow-up attended 85% of prescribed visits and completed 82.5% of the home program. Assuming zero compliance after dropout, 76% of visits were attended and 73% of the prescribed home exercises were completed. CONCLUSIONS: The short term of Schroth PSSE intervention added to standard care provided a large benefit as compared to standard care alone. Four (LC and SOC) patients require treatment for the additional benefit of a 6-month long Schroth intervention to be observed beyond the standard of care in at least one patient. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01610908 April 2, 2012.

Schroth Physiotherapeutic Scoliosis-Specific Exercises Added to the Standard of Care Lead to Better Cobb Angle Outcomes in Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis - an Assessor and Statistician Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The North American non-surgical standard of care for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) includes observation and bracing, but not exercises. Schroth physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) showed promise in several studies of suboptimal methodology. The Scoliosis Research Society calls for rigorous studies supporting the role of exercises before including it as a treatment recommendation for scoliosis. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of a six-month Schroth PSSE intervention added to standard of care (Experimental group) on the Cobb angle compared to standard of care alone (Control group) in patients with AIS. METHODS: Fifty patients with AIS aged 10-18 years, with curves of 10°-45° and Risser grade 0-5 were recruited from a single pediatric scoliosis clinic and randomized to the Experimental or Control group. Outcomes included the change in the Cobb angles of the Largest Curve and Sum of Curves from baseline to six months. The intervention consisted of a 30-45 minute daily home program and weekly supervised sessions. Intention-to-treat and per protocol linear mixed effects model analyses are reported. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, after six months, the Schroth group had significantly smaller Largest Curve than controls (-3.5°, 95% CI -1.1° to -5.9°, p = 0.006). Likewise, the between-group difference in the square root of the Sum of Curves was -0.40°, (95% CI -0.03° to -0.8°, p = 0.046), suggesting that an average patient with 51.2° at baseline, will have a 49.3° Sum of Curves at six months in the Schroth group, and 55.1° in the control group with the difference between groups increasing with severity. Per protocol analyses produced similar, but larger differences: Largest Curve = -4.1° (95% CI -1.7° to -6.5°, p = 0.002) and [Formula: see text] (95% CI -0.8 to 0.2, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Schroth PSSE added to the standard of care were superior compared to standard of care alone for reducing the curve severity in patients with AIS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01610908.

The effect of Schroth exercises added to the standard of care on the quality of life and muscle endurance in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis-an assessor and statistician blinded randomized controlled trial: "SOSORT 2015 Award Winner".

BACKGROUND: In North America, care recommendations for adolescents with small idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) curves include observation or bracing. Schroth scoliosis-specific exercises have demonstrated promising results on various outcomes in uncontrolled studies. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to determine the effect of Schroth exercises combined with the standard of care on quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes and back muscle endurance (BME) compared to standard of care alone in patients with AIS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty patients with AIS, aged 10-18 years, with curves 10-45 °, recruited from a scoliosis clinic were randomized to receive standard of care or supervised Schroth exercises plus standard of care for 6 months. Schroth exercises were taught over five sessions in the first two weeks. A daily home program was adjusted during weekly supervised sessions. The assessor and the statistician were blinded. Outcomes included the Biering-Sorensen (BME) test, Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22r) and Spinal Appearance Questionnaires (SAQ) scores. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) linear mixed effects models were analyzed. Because ITT and PP analyses produced similar results, only ITT is reported. RESULTS: After 3 months, BME in the Schroth group improved by 32.3 s, and in the control by 4.8 s. This 27.5 s difference in change between groups was statically significant (95 % CI 1.1 to 53.8 s, p = 0.04). From 3 to 6 months, the self-image improved in the Schroth group by 0.13 and deteriorated in the control by 0.17 (0.3, 95 % CI 0.01 to 0.59, p = 0.049). A difference between groups for the change in the SRS-22r pain score transformed to its power of four was observed from 3 to 6 months (85.3, 95 % CI 8.1 to 162.5, p = 0.03), where (SRS-22 pain score)(4) increased by 65.3 in the Schroth and decreased by 20.0 in the control group. Covariates: age, self-efficacy, brace-wear, Schroth classification, and height had significant main effects on some outcomes. Baseline ceiling effects were high: SRS-22r (pain = 18.4 %, function = 28.6 %), and SAQ (prominence = 26.5 %, waist = 29.2 %, chest = 46.9 %, trunk shift = 12.2 % and shoulders = 18.4 %). CONCLUSIONS: Supervised Schroth exercises provided added benefit to the standard of care by improving SRS-22r pain, self-image scores and BME. Given the high prevalence of ceiling effects on SRS-22r and SAQ questionnaires' domains, we hypothesize that in the AIS population receiving conservative treatments, different QOL questionnaires with adequate responsiveness are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Schroth Exercise Trial for Scoliosis NCT01610908.

Effect of Schroth exercises on curve characteristics and clinical outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The promising results of Schroth scoliosis-specific exercises for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis found in low-quality studies will be strengthened by confirmation in a randomised controlled trial. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: 1. Are Schroth exercises combined with standard care for 6 months more effective than standard care alone in improving radiographic and clinical outcomes for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis? 2. Will the outcomes of the control group (who will be offered Schroth therapy delayed by 6 months) improve after 6 months of Schroth therapy? 3. Are the effects maintained 6 months after discontinuing the supervised intervention? DESIGN: This is an assessor-blinded and statistician-blinded randomised controlled trial with transfer of the controls to the exercise group after 6 months. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Two hundred and fifty-eight consecutive adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis, aged 10 to 16 years, treated with or without a brace, with curves between 10 and 45 deg Cobb and Risser sign ≤ 3 will be recruited from three scoliosis clinics. INTERVENTION: Combined with standard care, the Schroth group will receive five individual training sessions, followed by weekly group classes and daily home exercises for 6 months. CONTROL: Controls will only receive standard care consisting of observation or bracing, and will be offered Schroth therapy 6 months later. MEASUREMENTS: Curve severity (Cobb angle) and vertebral rotation will be assessed from radiographs at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Secondary clinical outcomes (back muscle endurance, surface topography measures of posture, and self-reported perceived spinal appearance and quality of life) will be assessed at baseline, and every 3 months until 1-year follow-up. ANALYSIS: Data will be analysed using intention-to-treat linear mixed models. DISCUSSION: The results will demonstrate whether Schroth exercises combined with standard of care can improve outcomes in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. This study has potential to influence clinical practice worldwide, where exercises are not routinely prescribed for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis.