Research quality in scoliosis conservative treatment: state of the art.

Scoliosis Pub Date : 2015-07-11 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s13013-015-0046-7
Fabio Zaina, Michele Romano, Patrick Knott, Jean Claude de Mauroy, Theodoros B Grivas, Tomasz Kotwicki, Toru Maruyama, Joseph O'Brien, Manuel Rigo, Stefano Negrini
{"title":"Research quality in scoliosis conservative treatment: state of the art.","authors":"Fabio Zaina, Michele Romano, Patrick Knott, Jean Claude de Mauroy, Theodoros B Grivas, Tomasz Kotwicki, Toru Maruyama, Joseph O'Brien, Manuel Rigo, Stefano Negrini","doi":"10.1186/s13013-015-0046-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The publication of research in the field of conservative treatment of scoliosis is increasing after a long period of progressive decline. In 2014, three high quality and scientifically sound papers gave new strength to the conservative scoliosis approach. The efficacy of treatment over observation was demonstrated by two RCTs for bracing, and one for scoliosis-specific exercises provided by a physical therapist. It is difficult to design strong studies in this field due to the long time needed for follow up and the challenge of recruiting patients and families willing to be involved in the decision process. Nevertheless, the main methodological errors are not related to the study design but rather on the way it is performed, which very frequently affects the reliability of results. The most common errors are: selection bias, with many studies including functional rather than a true structural scoliosis; inappropriate outcome measures, utilizing parameters not related to scoliosis progression or quality of life; inappropriate follow up, reporting only immediate results and not addressing end of growth results; an incorrect interpretation of findings, with an overestimation of results; and missing the evaluation of skeletal maturity, without which results cannot be considered stable. Being aware of these errors is extremely important both for authors and for readers in order to avoid questionable practices based on inconclusive studies that could harm patients. </p>","PeriodicalId":21722,"journal":{"name":"Scoliosis","volume":"10 ","pages":"21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s13013-015-0046-7","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scoliosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13013-015-0046-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

The publication of research in the field of conservative treatment of scoliosis is increasing after a long period of progressive decline. In 2014, three high quality and scientifically sound papers gave new strength to the conservative scoliosis approach. The efficacy of treatment over observation was demonstrated by two RCTs for bracing, and one for scoliosis-specific exercises provided by a physical therapist. It is difficult to design strong studies in this field due to the long time needed for follow up and the challenge of recruiting patients and families willing to be involved in the decision process. Nevertheless, the main methodological errors are not related to the study design but rather on the way it is performed, which very frequently affects the reliability of results. The most common errors are: selection bias, with many studies including functional rather than a true structural scoliosis; inappropriate outcome measures, utilizing parameters not related to scoliosis progression or quality of life; inappropriate follow up, reporting only immediate results and not addressing end of growth results; an incorrect interpretation of findings, with an overestimation of results; and missing the evaluation of skeletal maturity, without which results cannot be considered stable. Being aware of these errors is extremely important both for authors and for readers in order to avoid questionable practices based on inconclusive studies that could harm patients.

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
脊柱侧凸保守治疗的研究质量:最新进展。
脊柱侧凸保守治疗领域的研究在经历了长期的渐进式下降后正在增加。2014年,三篇高质量、科学合理的论文为保守性脊柱侧凸入路注入了新的力量。两项随机对照试验证明了治疗优于观察的效果,其中一项是由物理治疗师提供的脊柱侧凸特异性锻炼。由于需要很长时间的随访,以及招募愿意参与决策过程的患者和家属的挑战,很难在这一领域设计强有力的研究。然而,主要的方法学错误与研究设计无关,而是与进行研究的方式有关,这经常会影响结果的可靠性。最常见的错误是:选择偏差,许多研究包括功能性而不是真正的结构性脊柱侧凸;结果测量不恰当,使用与脊柱侧凸进展或生活质量无关的参数;不恰当的跟进,只报告即时的结果,而不解决最终的增长结果;对结果的错误解释,对结果的高估;缺少对骨骼成熟度的评估,没有评估结果就不能被认为是稳定的。意识到这些错误对作者和读者来说都是极其重要的,以避免基于可能伤害患者的非结论性研究的可疑做法。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Gravity-induced coronal plane joint moments in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis Retraction Note: Relationship between bone density and bone metabolism in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis Fasting total ghrelin levels are increased in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis Early weaning in idiopathic scoliosis Post-operative shoulder imbalance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a study of clinical photographs
×
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:481959085
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