"Am I different?" Coping and mental health among teenagers with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: To explore the stressors, coping strategies, and mental health of adolescents diagnosed with idiopathic scoliosis. DESIGN AND METHODS: This study adopted a descriptive qualitative study design. Twelve participants were recruited from a local non-government organization in Hong Kong. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data. Verbatim transcriptions of interviews were coded and analyzed using thematic analysis. The guideline of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies was used to report the findings. RESULTS: Five themes were identified: "Disease- and treatment-induced changes and stressors", "Cognitive assessment and personal perceptions", "Behavioral and emotional coping strategies", "Social interactions and social support", and "Deteriorating or thriving in psychological development and well-being". CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis experienced a variety of physical and psychological stressors. It is imperative to prioritize efforts to promote adaptive coping and activate social support systems to achieve better outcomes in this population. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare providers should aim to comprehend the experiences of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis for improved clinical interactions and holistic care. Future research should prioritize coping-based interventions, to enhance adaptive coping behaviors and the well-being of this population.

Can anterior vertebral body tethering provide superior range of motion outcomes compared to posterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) was introduced as a fusionless alternative to treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) while preserving range of motion (ROM). This is the first systematic review to compare the ROM outcomes between AVBT and PSF in treating AIS. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search on PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria were patients with AIS treated with AVBT or PSF or both, and clearly defined ROM outcomes; exclusion criteria were scoliosis other than AIS, biomechanical or cadaveric studies, non-English publications, case reports, conference summaries, unpublished literature, commentaries, and reviews. Primary outcome was ROM. Secondary outcomes included Cobb angle correction, quality of life (QOL), complications, and muscle strength and endurance. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in this review. We found moderate evidence to support that AVBT results in superior ROM outcomes than PSF while achieving comparable Cobb angle correction with low evidence. The comparison of QOL outcomes between AVBT and PSF remained inconclusive. In addition to the complications noted conventionally in PSF, AVBT could result in over-correction and distal adding-on. We also found very low evidence to support that AIS patients treated with AVBT have superior muscle strength and endurance when compared to those treated with PSF. CONCLUSIONS: AVBT provides better preservation of ROM and muscle strength postoperatively when compared with PSF, while achieving comparable curve correction. Future studies should explore the spinal growth trajectory to determine the window of opportunity for AVBT in AIS.

Longitudinal comparison of direct medical cost, radiological and health-related quality of life treatment outcomes between traditional growing rods and magnetically controlled growing rods from preoperative to maturity.

BACKGROUND: Magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR) have replaced traditional growing rods (TGR) in the past decade, however, a comparison of their direct costs and treatment outcomes based on real longitudinal data is lacking. This study aims to compare the direct cost and treatment outcomes between TGR and MCGR, whilst incorporating complications, reoperations and changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) throughout the entire treatment course. METHODS: Patients with early onset scoliosis (EOS) who underwent initial growing rod surgery between 2003 and 2016 at a tertiary scoliosis clinic were studied with longitudinal data. Accumulated direct medical costs were calculated based on the unit cost of surgeries of each TGR and MCGR, costs incurred for any rod exchange or remedial surgery for post-operative complication. Treatment outcomes were evaluated via: Patient's HRQoL using SRS-22r questionnaire, and radiological parameters (including major curve correction, spine length gains, spinal balance) throughout the treatment until maturity. RESULTS: A total of 27 EOS patients (16 MCGR, 11 TGR) were studied. Total direct cost of index surgery for MCGR was HKD$223,108 versus lower cost of HKD$135,184 for TGR (p < 0.001). At 2-3 years post-index surgery, accumulative total direct medical cost of MCGR and TGR became most comparable (TGR:MCGR ratio = 1.010) and had reached neutrality between the two groups since. Radiological parameters had no intergroup differences at maturity. For HRQoL, TGR group had shown the trend of less pain (domain score mean difference: 0.53, p = 0.024) post-index surgery and better self-appearance (domain score mean difference: 1.08, p = 0.017) before fusion. Higher satisfaction with treatment (domain score mean difference: 0.76, p = 0.029) was demonstrated by TGR patients at fusion/maturity. MCGR had negative (rs = -0.693) versus TGR's positive (rs = 0.989) correlations (p < 0.05) of cost and SRS-22r total scores at 2-3 years post-index surgery. CONCLUSIONS: From index surgery to maturity, TGR demonstrated better satisfaction with treatment by patients and comparable overall HRQoL with MCGR during the treatment course, as MCGR did not show apparent benefit despite less surgeries and cost neutrality between the two groups at 2-3 years post-index surgery.

Poor Bone Quality, Multilevel Surgery, and Narrow and Tall Cages Are Associated with Intraoperative Endplate Injuries and Late-onset Cage Subsidence in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: A major complication of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is cage subsidence, which may lead to clinical problems, including loss of disc height correction, altered spinal alignment, recurrent pain, and vertebral body fracture. A thorough review of the current knowledge about the risk factors for the two types of cage subsidence after LLIF-intraoperative endplate injury and late-onset cage subsidence-could bring attention to well-established risk factors for clinical consideration while identifying any incompletely characterized factors that require further research to clarify. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We performed a systematic review to answer the following questions: (1) Are bone quality and surrogates for bone quality, such as patient age and sex, associated with an increased likelihood of cage subsidence? (2) Are implant-related factors associated with an increased likelihood of cage subsidence? METHODS: Two independent reviewers comprehensively searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science from 1997 to 2020 to identify all potential risk factors for cage subsidence after LLIF. Discrepancies were settled through discussion during full-text screening. Search terms included "lateral" AND "interbody fusion" AND "subsidence" OR "settling" OR "endplate injury" OR "endplate violation" WITHOUT "cervical" OR "transforaminal" OR "biomechanical." Eligible studies were retrospective or prospective comparative studies, randomized controlled trials, and case series with sample sizes of 10 patients or more reporting risk factors for cage subsidence or endplate injury after LLIF. Studies that involved cervical interbody fusions and biomechanical and cadaveric experiments were excluded. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the studies' quality of evidence. The initial database review found 400 articles. Thirty-four articles with moderate- to very-low-quality evidence met the inclusion criteria for analysis. A total of 3233 patients (58% [1860] of whom were female) were included in this review. Two types of cage subsidence were reviewed: late-onset cage subsidence, which occurs gradually postoperatively, and intraoperative endplate injury, which is derived from iatrogenic endplate violation during endplate preparation or cage insertion. Among 20 studies with moderate quality of evidence according to the GRADE criteria, eight studies reported risk factors for cage subsidence related to bone mineral density and its surrogates and 12 studies focused on risk factors regarding implant factors, including cage dimension, cage material, construct length, and supplementary instrumentation. RESULTS: Patients with a dual x-ray absorptiometry T-score of -1.0 or less, age older than 65 years, and female sex were considered to have a high risk of both types of cage subsidence. Regarding cage size, cage width ≥ 22 mm helped to avoid late-onset cage subsidence, and cage height ≤ 11 mm was recommended by some studies to avoid intraoperative endplate injuries. Studies recommended that multilevel LLIF should be conducted with extra caution because of a high risk of losing the effect of indirect decompression. Studies found that standalone LLIF might be sufficient for patients without osteoporosis or obesity, and supplementary instrumentation should be considered to maintain the postoperative disc height and prevent subsidence progression in patients with multiple risk factors. The effect of the bone graft, cage material, endplate condition, and supplementary instrumentation on cage subsidence remained vague or controversial. CONCLUSION: Patients with poor bone density, patients who are older than 65 years, and female patients should be counseled about their high risk of developing cage subsidence. Surgeons should avoid narrow cages when performing LLIF to minimize the risk of late-onset cage subsidence, while being cautious of an aggressive attempt to restore disc height with a tall cage as it may lead to intraoperative endplate injury. For multilevel constructs, direct decompression approaches, such as posterior and transforaminal LIF, should be considered before LLIF, since the effect of indirect decompression may be difficult to maintain in multilevel LLIF because of high risks of cage subsidence. The effect of the cage material and supplementary instrumentation require stronger evidence from prospectively designed studies with larger sample size that randomly assign patients to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) or titanium cages and different fixation types. Future research on intraoperative endplate injuries should focus on the specific timing of when endplate violation occurs with the help of intraoperative imaging so that attempts can be made to minimize its occurrence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Perception and use of complementary and alternative medicine for low back pain.

PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in patients with low back pain (LBP) and to identify its correlation with demographic factors, clinical condition and psychosocial factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 278 LBP patients. Use of CAM, demographic parameters and disease duration were determined. Self-reported health status and self-rated scales assessed the effect of disease on quality of life and emotional well-being, respectively. Satisfaction with orthopaedic care and belief partiality towards CAM were assessed. RESULTS: In all, 72.3% patients sought CAM treatment. The most common choice of CAM was traditional Chinese medicine (TCM; n = 166), followed by massage therapy ( n = 114) and chiropractic treatment ( n = 45). Within TCM, acupuncture was the most popular treatment for LBP ( n = 127). Only 32.5% patients informed their doctors of their CAM use. In univariate analyses, factors positively associated with CAM use included duration of LBP (odds ratio (OR) = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-1.97), use of CAM in close social circles (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.15-3.43) and summary score for belief partiality towards CAM (OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.13-1.23). Variables negatively and significantly associated with status of CAM use include age (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95-0.99) and summary score for satisfaction with orthopaedic care (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.88-0.99). CONCLUSION: CAM use in patients with LBP is prevalent and largely unknown to their doctors. Personal beliefs and their satisfaction with conventional medical treatment both play a part in their decisions to use CAM. Future studies may aim at understanding the effect of CAM on patient adherence to conventional medical treatment and patients' perception of well-being and pain.