Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a three-dimensional spine and trunk deformity. Bracing is an effective treatment for medium-degree curves. Thermal sensors help monitor patients’ adherence (compliance), a critical issue in bracing treatment. Some studies investigated adherence determinants but rarely through sensors or in highly adherent cohorts. We aimed to verify the influence of personal and clinical variables routinely registered by physicians on adherence to brace treatment in a large cohort of consecutive AIS patients from a highly adherent cohort. We performed a cross-sectional study of patients consecutively recruited in the last three years at a tertiary referral institute and treated with braces for one year. To ensure high adherence, for years, we have provided specific support to brace treatment through a series of cognitive-behavioural interventions for patients and parents. We used iButton thermal sensor systematic data collection to precisely analyse the real brace-wearing time. We included 514 adolescents, age 13.8 ± 1.6, with the worst scoliosis curve of 34.5 ± 10.3° Cobb. We found a 95% (95CI 60–101%) adherence to the brace prescription of 21.9 ± 1.7 h per day. Determinants included gender (91% vs. 84%; females vs. males) and age < 14 years (92% vs. 88%). Brace hours prescription, BMI, and all clinical variables (worst curve Cobb degrees, angle of trunk rotation, and TRACE index for aesthetics) did not influence adherence.

Background: We need good outcome predictors to maximize the treatment efficiency of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). The in-brace correction has shown an important predictive effect on brace failure, while the influence of other variables is still debated. We aimed to identify new outcome predictors from a big prospective database of AIS. Methods: Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Inclusion criteria: AIS between 21 and 45°, Risser 0–2, brace prescription during the observation, treatment conclusion. All of the participants followed a personalized conservative approach according to the SOSORT Guidelines. Outcomes: End of growth below 30°–40°–50°. The regression model included age, BMI, Cobb angle, ATR, TRACE score, real brace wear (RBW), and in-brace correction (IBC). Results: A total of 1050 patients, 84% females, ages 12.1 ± 1.1, 28.2 ± 7.9° Cobb. IBC increased by 30%, 24%, and 23% the odds of ending treatment below 30°, 40°, and 50°, respectively. The OR did not change after the covariate adjustment. Cobb angle and ATR at the start also showed a predictive effect. Conclusions: The systematic evaluation of IBC in clinics is useful for individuating the patient response to brace treatment more accurately, even in relation to the Cobb angle and ATR degrees at the start. Further studies are needed to increase the knowledge on predictors of AIS treatment results.