Etiology remains king: health-related quality of life outcome at 5 years following growth friendly instrumentation for EOS.

IF 1.8 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Spine deformity Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1007/s43390-024-01029-0
K Aaron Shaw, David Thornberg, Anna McClung, Chan-Hee Jo, Mark Erickson, Michael Vitale, Scott Luhmann, Lindsay Andras, Peter Sturm, Hiroko Matsumoto, Brandon Ramo
{"title":"Etiology remains king: health-related quality of life outcome at 5 years following growth friendly instrumentation for EOS.","authors":"K Aaron Shaw, David Thornberg, Anna McClung, Chan-Hee Jo, Mark Erickson, Michael Vitale, Scott Luhmann, Lindsay Andras, Peter Sturm, Hiroko Matsumoto, Brandon Ramo","doi":"10.1007/s43390-024-01029-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The etiology of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) has been shown to significantly influence baseline parent-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures as assessed by the Early Onset Scoliosis Questionnaire (EOSQ). However, it remains unclear how etiology influences mid-term outcomes following growth friendly instrumentation (GFI) for EOS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of a multi-center prospective spinal database was performed. Children undergoing primary distraction-based, GFI for EOS with complete baseline, 2-year, and 5-year post-surgical EOSQ were included. The identified children were subdivided by etiology as classified by the C-EOS system. EOSQ scores were compared over time according to etiology cohorts and between instrumentation types. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as ≥ 20% change in domain score and compared across etiologies. Dominance analysis was used to assess for drivers of treatment satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 178 children (mean 7.3 ± 2.1 years, 51.1% female) were included. The most common etiology was neuromuscular (NM: 36.5%), with the majority of children treated with MCGR (N = 125). Significant differences between etiology groups were present with congenital and idiopathic cohorts demonstrating similar EOSQ domain scores that were significantly higher than neuromuscular and syndromic cohorts. In assessing clinically important changes in EOSQ scores over the 5-year follow-up period, neuromuscular and syndromic patients demonstrated the greatest capacity for improved outcomes. Instrumentation type had no influence on HRQoL scores at 5-year follow-up. Etiology was a driver of satisfaction with syndromic etiology and transfer domain score at 2 years follow-up associated with dissatisfaction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Curve etiology remains a significant driver of HRQoL domains following growth-friendly instrumentation for EOS. Neuromuscular and syndromic patient have significantly lower domain scores. Despite this, or perhaps because of it, they also demonstrate the greatest capacity for clinically important improvement in HRQoL measures 5 years following intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":21796,"journal":{"name":"Spine deformity","volume":" ","pages":"929-938"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine deformity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-01029-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The etiology of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) has been shown to significantly influence baseline parent-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures as assessed by the Early Onset Scoliosis Questionnaire (EOSQ). However, it remains unclear how etiology influences mid-term outcomes following growth friendly instrumentation (GFI) for EOS.

Methods: A retrospective review of a multi-center prospective spinal database was performed. Children undergoing primary distraction-based, GFI for EOS with complete baseline, 2-year, and 5-year post-surgical EOSQ were included. The identified children were subdivided by etiology as classified by the C-EOS system. EOSQ scores were compared over time according to etiology cohorts and between instrumentation types. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as ≥ 20% change in domain score and compared across etiologies. Dominance analysis was used to assess for drivers of treatment satisfaction.

Results: A total of 178 children (mean 7.3 ± 2.1 years, 51.1% female) were included. The most common etiology was neuromuscular (NM: 36.5%), with the majority of children treated with MCGR (N = 125). Significant differences between etiology groups were present with congenital and idiopathic cohorts demonstrating similar EOSQ domain scores that were significantly higher than neuromuscular and syndromic cohorts. In assessing clinically important changes in EOSQ scores over the 5-year follow-up period, neuromuscular and syndromic patients demonstrated the greatest capacity for improved outcomes. Instrumentation type had no influence on HRQoL scores at 5-year follow-up. Etiology was a driver of satisfaction with syndromic etiology and transfer domain score at 2 years follow-up associated with dissatisfaction.

Conclusion: Curve etiology remains a significant driver of HRQoL domains following growth-friendly instrumentation for EOS. Neuromuscular and syndromic patient have significantly lower domain scores. Despite this, or perhaps because of it, they also demonstrate the greatest capacity for clinically important improvement in HRQoL measures 5 years following intervention.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
病因学仍然是王道:使用生长友好型仪器治疗EOS后5年的健康相关生活质量结果。
目的:早发性脊柱侧凸(EOS)的病因学已被证明显著影响父母报告的基线健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)指标,该指标由早发性脊柱侧凸问卷(EOSQ)评估。然而,目前尚不清楚病因如何影响生长友好仪器(GFI)治疗EOS的中期结果。方法:对多中心前瞻性脊柱数据库进行回顾性分析。包括原发性分心,GFI为EOS,完全基线,术后2年和5年EOSQ的儿童。经鉴定的患儿按病因细分,按C-EOS系统分类。根据病因队列和不同仪器类型比较EOSQ评分。最小临床重要差异(MCID)定义为域评分变化≥20%,并比较不同病因。优势分析用于评估治疗满意度的驱动因素。结果:共纳入178例儿童,平均7.3±2.1岁,女性51.1%。最常见的病因是神经肌肉(NM: 36.5%),大多数儿童接受MCGR治疗(N = 125)。病因组之间存在显著差异,先天性和特发性队列显示相似的EOSQ结构域评分明显高于神经肌肉和综合征队列。在评估5年随访期间EOSQ评分的临床重要变化时,神经肌肉和综合征患者表现出最大的改善能力。5年随访时,器械类型对HRQoL评分无影响。病因学是对综合征病因学满意度的驱动因素,2年随访时转移域评分与不满意度相关。结论:曲线病因学仍然是EOS生长友好型仪器后HRQoL域的重要驱动因素。神经肌肉和综合征患者的域得分明显较低。尽管如此,或者正因为如此,它们在干预后5年的HRQoL测量中也显示出最大的临床重要改善能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
18.80%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Spine Deformity the official journal of the?Scoliosis Research Society is a peer-refereed publication to disseminate knowledge on basic science and clinical research into the?etiology?biomechanics?treatment?methods and outcomes of all types of?spinal deformities. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal's area of interest.The?journal?will enhance the mission of the Society which is to foster the optimal care of all patients with?spine?deformities worldwide. Articles published in?Spine Deformity?are Medline indexed in PubMed.? The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical and basic research. Spine Deformity will only publish studies that have institutional review board (IRB) or similar ethics committee approval for human and animal studies and have strictly observed these guidelines. The minimum follow-up period for follow-up clinical studies is 24 months.
期刊最新文献
Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis is associated with disc degeneration in pediatric patients. Limited fusion strategy for congenital scoliosis: is it truly one and done? A scoping review of published reviews on the use of bracing in scoliosis. Correction: The impact of the social determinants of health on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review. Correction: Is it possible to return to skiing following long-construct spinal deformity surgery?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1