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). 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. 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. 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.

SEAS is the acronym for “Scientific Exercise Approach to Scoliosis”, a name related to the continuous changes of the approach based on results published in the literature. SEAS is an individualized exercise program adapted to all situations of conservative treatment of scoliosis: stand-alone in low-medium degree curves during growth to reduce the risk of bracing; complimentary to bracing in medium-high degree curves during growth, with the aim to increase correction, prepare weaning, and avoid/reduce side-effects; for adults either progressing or fused, to help stabilising the curve and reduce disability. SEAS is based on a specific active self-correction technique performed without external aid, and incorporated in functional exercises. Evaluation tests guide the choice of the exercises most appropriate to the individual patient. Improvement of the stability of the spine in active self-correction is the primary objective of SEAS. SEAS exercises train neuromotor function so to stimulate by reflex a self-corrected posture during the activities of daily life. SEAS can be performed as an outpatient (two/three times a week 45 for minutes) or as a home program to be performed 20 minutes daily. In the last case, expert physiotherapy sessions of 1.5 hours every three months are proposed. Different papers, including a randomized controlled trial (2014), published over the past several years, documented the efficacy of the SEAS approach applied in the various phases of scoliosis treatment in reducing Cobb angle progression and the need to wear a brace. SEAS is an approach to scoliosis exercise treatment with a strong modern neurophysiological basis, to reduce requirements for patients and possibly the costs for families linked to the frequency and intensity of treatment and evaluations. Therefore, SEAS allows treating a large number of patients coming from far away. Even if SEAS appears simple by requiring less physiotherapist supervision and by using fewer home exercises prescribed at a lower dose than some of the other scoliosis-specific exercise approaches, real expertise in scoliosis, exercises, and patient and family management is required. The program has no copyrights, and teachers are being trained all over the world.

Recently an RCT confirmed brace efficacy in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. Previously, a Cochrane review suggested also producing studies according to the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) criteria on the effectiveness of bracing for AIS. Even if the SRS criteria propose a prospective design, until now only one out of 6 published studies was prospective. Our purpose was to evaluate the effects of bracing plus exercises following the SRS and the international Society on Scoliosis Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) criteria for AIS conservative treatment.

Background: The effectiveness of bracing relies on the quality of the brace, compliance of the patient, and some disease factors. Patients and parents tend to overestimate adherence, so an objective assessment of compliance has been developed through the use of heat sensors. In 2010 we started the everyday clinical use of a temperature sensor, and the aim of this study is to present our initial results. Methods: Population: A prospective cohort of 68 scoliosis patients that finished at least 4 months of brace treatment on March 31, 2011: 48 at their first evaluation (79% females, age 14.2±2.4) and 20 already in treatment. Treatment: Bracing (SPoRT concept); physiotherapic specific exercises (SEAS School); team approach according to the SOSORT Bracing Management Guidelines. Methods. A heat sensor, “Thermobrace” (TB), has been validated and applied to the brace. The real (measured by TB) and referred (reported by the patient) compliances were calculated. Statistics. The distribution was not normal, hence median and 95% interval confidence (IC95) and non-parametric tests had to be used. Results: Average TB use: 5.5±1.5 months. Brace prescription was 23 hours/day (h/d) (IC95 18–23), with a referred compliance of 100% (IC95 70.7-100%) and a real one of 91.7% (IC95 56.6-101.7%), corresponding to 20 h/d (IC95 11–23). The more the brace was prescribed, the more compliant the patient was (94.8% in 23 h/d vs. 73.2% in 18 h/d, P < 0.05). Sixty percent of the patients had at least 90% compliance, and 45% remained within 1 hour of what had been prescribed. Non-wearing days were 0 (IC95 0–12.95), and involved 29% of patients. Conclusion: This is the first study using a TB in a setting of respect for the SOSORT criteria for bracing, and it states that it is possible to achieve a very good compliance, even with a full time prescription, and better than what was previously reported (80% maximum). We hypothesize that the treating team (SOSORT criteria) plays a major role in our results. This study suggests that compliance is neither due to the type of treatment only nor to the patient alone. According to our experience, TB offers valuable insights and do not undermine the relationship with the patients.

Study Design.: Comparative effectiveness study Objective.: To evaluate factors leading to higher percentage of brace failures in a cohort of North American patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis relative to their peers in Italy. Summary of Background Data.: Studies of bracing in United States have shown worse outcomes than studies from European centers, possibly due to sample characteristics or treatment approaches. Methods.: Sample: Braced patients, aged 10 to 15, Risser <3, Cobb 20°- to 40°, observed to Cobb ≥40° and/or ≥Risser 4 selected from prospective databases. Comparators: Bracing per Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST) (TLSO) and Italian Scientific Spine Institute (ISICO) protocol (SPoRT braces with or without SEAS exercises). Baseline characteristics (sex, age, BMI, Risser, Cobb, curve type) and average hours of brace wear/day. Differences in programs (e.g., SEAS, type of brace, weaning protocol) were captured by a variable named “SITE.” Outcome: Treatment failure (Cobb ≥40 before Risser 4). Statistics: Comparison of baseline characteristics, analyses of risk factors, treatment components, and outcomes within and between cohorts using logistic regression. Results.: A total of 157 BrAIST and 81 ISICO subjects were included. Cohorts were similar at baseline but differed significantly in terms of average hours of brace wear: 18.31 in the ISICO versus 11.76 in the BrAIST cohort. Twelve percent of the ISICO and 39% of the BrAIST cohort had failed treatment. Age, Risser, Cobb, and a thoracic apex predicted failure in both groups. SITE was related to failure (odds ratio [OR] = 0.19), indicating lower odds of failure with ISICO versus BrAIST approach. With both SITE and wear time in the model, SITE loose significance. In the final model, the adjusted odds of failure were higher in boys (OR = 3.34), and those with lowest BMI (OR = 9.83); the odds increased with the Cobb angle (OR = 1.23), and decreased with age (OR = 0.41) and hours of wear (OR = 0.86). Conclusion.: Treatment at the ISICO resulted in a lower failure rate, primarily explained by longer average hours of brace wear. Level of Evidence: 3