Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Physical exercises in the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis at risk of brace treatment – SOSORT consensus paper 2005

  • Hans-Rudolf Weiss1Email author,
  • Stefano Negrini2,
  • Martha C Hawes3,
  • Manuel Rigo4,
  • Tomasz Kotwicki5,
  • Theodoros B Grivas6,
  • Toru Maruyama7 and
  • members of the SOSORT
Contributed equally
Scoliosis20061:6

DOI: 10.1186/1748-7161-1-6

Received: 06 December 2005

Accepted: 11 May 2006

Published: 11 May 2006

Abstract

Background

Based on a recognized need for research to examine the premise that nonsurgical approaches can be used effectively to treat signs and symptoms of scoliosis, a scientific society on scoliosis orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment (SOSORT) was established in Barcelona in 2004. SOSORT has a primary goal of implementing multidisciplinary research to develop quantitative, objective data to address the role of conservative therapies in the treatment of scoliosis. This international working group of clinicians and scientists specializing in treatment of scoliosis met in Milan, Italy in January 2005.

Methods

As a baseline for developing a consensus for language and goals for proposed multicenter clinical studies, we developed questionnaires to examine current beliefs, before and after the meeting, regarding (1) the aims of physical exercises; (2) standards of treatment; and (3) the impact of such treatment performed by specialists in the field.

Results

The responses to the questionnaires show that, in principle, specialists in scoliosis physiotherapy do not disagree and that several features can be regarded, currently, as standard features in the rehabilitation of scoliosis patients. These features include autocorrection in 3D, training in ADL, stabilizing the corrected posture, and patient education.

1. Background

For treatment of all pediatric spinal deformities, the goal is to maintain function and prevent symptoms in the short- and long-term. In children with scoliosis, as summarized below, predictable signs and symptoms including pain and reduced pulmonary function begin early in life and worsen with age. Most curvatures still present at skeletal maturity also continue to worsen throughout life. For children with scoliosis, therefore, optimal treatment goals include reversing curvature magnitude and/or preventing curvature progression, pain, and pulmonary dysfunctionover a lifetime.

Pain

Most clinical outcome surveys have revealed that, by early adulthood, the majority of scoliosis patients suffer from pain [115]. Only one large, controlled survey has been carried out, to date [16]. In that study, 1178 young adults, interviewed 10 years after diagnosis in adolescence, reported a significantly higher incidence of pain than 1217 control subjects. Of the scoliosis patients reporting pain, 23% (147/650) described it as 'horrible, excruciating, distressing' compared with 1% (6/416) of the control subjects who reported pain. Similar results were reported at >44 year followup [17]. Of a subset of 69 patients treated in adolescence (from an original population of 444), twice as many scoliosis patients (77% vs 35%) suffered from pain compared with a population of adults of comparable age (>55 years). Incidence of chronic pain was almost three fold higher in the scoliosis patients (61%) compared with the controls without scoliosis (22%). This is despite the fact that the 'control' popoulation was selected from hospital clinics, nursing homes, and senior citizens' centers where incidence of disability is exceptionally high [18, 19]. How scoliosis causes pain is not clear, but the magnitude of pain in adult scoliosis patients recently has been found to be inversely proportional to curvature flexibility [20]. Related factors linked with pain include regional balance, instability and pathological mechanical loads on spinal elements [21].

Pulmonary dysfunction

Thoracic scoliosis in children results in characteristic signs of pulmonary dysfunction including reduced vital capacity (VC) and impaired exercise capacity (EC) [2228]. Because the mechanism for impaired function is reduced mobility of the chest wall and such mobility deteriorates with age, pulmonary function deteriorates according to curvature magnitude even when the curvature itself does not progress [2933]. In severe cases death occurs by respiratory failure [3035]. The effects of reduced pulmonary function in patients with mild to moderate scoliosis are not known and have been dismissed as insignificant [e.g., [36, 37]]. Recent studies, however, have shown that VC and EC characteristic of patients with mild to moderate scoliosis (<85% predicted) are more reliable predictors of increased mortality than diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease [3840]. Patient-described pulmonary symptoms, in general, are not a reliable indicator because patients usually are unaware of their limitations even when documented signs are severe and respiratory failure is imminent [2933, 4143].

Progression

Once a flexible spinal curvature evolves into a spinal deformity, a 'vicious cycle' is initiated in which continuous asymmetric loading of the spinal elements fosters continued progression [4446]. Only a few small surveys have examined the epidemiology of progression and insufficient information is available to reliably predict outcome for any given patient [47, 48]. In general, the danger for dramatic progression is highest during periods of rapid growth, but most cases continue to progress throughout life [1, 15, 4850]. Some individuals with similar curves exhibit marked progression after skeletal maturity while others are relatively stable [41]. The bases for such differences are unknown, though some have suggested that the likelihood of progression is greater the more rigid the curvature [51].

Role of exercise in treatment of scoliosis

Exercise based therapies, alone or in combination with orthopedic approaches, are a logical approach to improve and maintain flexibility and function in patients at risk for pain, pulmonary dysfunction, and progression. Data from the Schroth clinic in Bad Sobernheim, Germany reveal improved pulmonary function [52, 53] and reduced pain [5456] in response to an intensive scoliosis in-patient rehabilitation (SIR) regime. Among the small number of studies which have examined it formally [5663], progression was less in patient populations who were treated with exercise [reviewed in [64]]. When exercise was prescribed but was not carried out by the patients, progression was similar to untreated populations [60].

The role of exercise based therapies as discussed in the spine literature has been controversial, however, with often-repeated claims that research has shown that such approaches are ineffective in treating scoliosis [e.g. [6578]]. A systematic review of articles published in English throughout history produced no data in support of such claims [79]. As pointed out by Focarile et al., [80] in 1991, 'Experimental controlled studies of different therapies seem to be justified both on ethical and scientific grounds.'

SOSORT was established in 2004 to respond to a need for objective scientific information from independent sources. A meeting was held in Milan, Italy, to explore existing community perspectives regarding (1) the aims of physical exercises; (2) standards of treatment; and (3) the impact of such treatment performed by specialists in the field. The goal was to initiate a dialog for building a working consensus prior to initiation of multicenter research initiatives among members of SOSORT.

2. Methods

2.1. Premeeting-questionaire (before the consensus meeting)

Questionnaires were prepared through consensus among the authors of the study. A first version was drafted by the second author, then critiqued and revised through electronic mail conference to produce a second edition. The second version was submitted to a pre-test by e-mail, to obtain the final form. The title of the questionnaire was "Therapeutic aims of physical exercise treatment in patients at risk of brace treatment."

The following clinical description was given:

Patient at the start of pubertal growth spurt. Curve at high risk of progression and high risk of prescription of a brace. You propose physical exercises to prevent progression.

The following questions were asked:

1. What are the therapeutic aims of the exercises you propose (i.e what do you want to improve?)

2. Which aims are more important ( priority : 1 high – 2 medium – 3 low) ?

3. Why do you choose these aims ?

4. How do you obtain these aims ?

During the preparation of the study, the possibly relevant therapeutic aims of the exercises for scoliosis treatment were proposed by the second author and submitted to a preliminary consensus among the authors of this study: The final list was provided in the questionnaire, with space to answer to questions 2, 3 and 4 for each therapeutic aim chosen. The possibly relevant therapeutic aims of the exercises for scoliosis treatment identified by the authors included:

  • Autocorrection 3D

  • Autoelongation

  • Coordination

  • Equilibrium

  • Ergonomy

  • General motor capacity

  • Muscular endurance

  • Muscular strength

  • Neuromotorial control of the spine

  • Increase of Range of Motion

  • Respiratory capacity

  • Respiratory education

  • Side-shift

  • Stabilisation

Responders could add any relevant aim.

Questionnaires constituted the abstracts of the "SOSORT consensus meeting in Milan, January 2005." These were sent, together with the Preliminary Program, to all the attendees of the "1st International Meeting on Conservative Management of Spinal Deformities" held January 2004 in Barcelona. The program also was distributed to all others with interest in conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis that it was possible to retrieve according to the indexed literature. To gather the maximum possible range of opinions, it was required to fill in the questionnaire independently by the participation to the Consensus Meeting, and to reply by e-mail 1.5 months before the Meeting. 20 persons or institutions responded to the premeeting questionnaire.

2.2. Postmeeting-questionnaire (after the consensus meeting)

During the Milano consensus meeting the attendees were asked to fill in the questionnaires after formal discussion.

Thirty attendees took part and filled in the questionnaire to state their opinion about their aims when treating scoliosis patients by physiotherapy. The results can be seen on Table 2.
Table 1

Premeeting answers

 

Answers

Median

Min

Max

Respiratory capacity

70%

2,5

0

3

Autocorrection 3D

70%

1

1

3

Respiratory education

60%

1,5

0

3

Equilibrium

55%

2

1

3

Muscular strength

55%

2

1

3

Autoelongation

50%

3

1

3

Increase of ROM

50%

3

1

3

Neuromotorial control

50%

1

1

3

Side-shift

50%

2

1

3

Stabilisation

50%

1

1

4

Muscular endurance

45%

2

1

3

Coordination

40%

2

1

3

Ergonomy

35%

2

2

3

General motor capacity

25%

2

1

2

Psychological aspects

10%

1

1

1

Scoliosis exercises in groups

5%

1

0

0

Restoring of physiological spinal curvatures (sagittal plane)

5%

1

1

1

Correction of contractures and muscles shortening

5%

1

1

1

Proprioception and tactile

5%

3

3

3

Neurodynamics

5%

3

3

3

Theoretical information for the patient and family

5%

3

3

3

Activities of daily living

5%

1

1

1

Self perception

5%

3

3

3

In – brace exercises

5%

3

3

3

Table 2

Postmeeting answers. Preferences relate to number of people who chose the single answer, while percentages relate only to people who had a preference to each single aim

Answers: 30

Preferences

Priorities

 

%

1

2

3

Autocorrection 3D

97%

90%

0%

7%

Theoretical information for the patient and family

87%

53%

27%

7%

Stabilisation

87%

50%

23%

13%

Self perception

87%

43%

33%

10%

Activities of daily living

83%

53%

20%

10%

Muscular endurance

83%

30%

33%

20%

Psychological aspects

77%

43%

20%

13%

Respiratory education

77%

27%

27%

23%

Neuromotorial control of the spine

70%

33%

30%

7%

Proprioception and tactile

70%

27%

33%

10%

Equilibrium

70%

20%

37%

13%

Restoring of physiological spinal curvatures (sagittal plane)

67%

57%

7%

3%

Respiratory capacity

67%

17%

23%

27%

Ergonomy

67%

10%

30%

27%

Correction of contractures and muscles shortening

63%

23%

30%

10%

Scoliosis exercises in groups

63%

10%

33%

20%

Renge of Motion

63%

7%

30%

27%

Coordination

60%

13%

37%

10%

General motor capacity

60%

3%

37%

20%

Muscular strength

57%

10%

27%

20%

Side-shift

53%

23%

23%

7%

Autoelongation

53%

13%

27%

13%

In – brace exercises

50%

10%

23%

17%

Neurodynamics

50%

7%

33%

10%

3. Results

3.1. Premeeting-test (before the consensus meeting)

The results are summarized in Table 1. Data were incomplete for some responders and statistical treatment was not attempted.

3.1.1. Topics with general consensus

The therapeutic aim rated highly important (Median 1) was 3D autocorrection having a high degree of consensus (17/20).

3.1.2. Topics with some consensus

Topics with some consensus were respiratory capacity (14/20) and respiratory education (12/20) (Median 1,5 – 2,5 = medium priority); equilibrium (Median 2 = medium priority; 11/20), muscular strength (Median 2 = medium priority; 11/20), neuromotorical control (Median 1 = high priority; 10/20) and stabilisation (Median 1 = high priority; 10/20).

The other aims given were not rated with a high priority. Nevertheless some consensus was found, with at least 5/20, for instance, considering an improvement of general motor capacity necessary.

3.1.3. Topics with no consensus

Aims added by certain authors included the following:

Exercise in groups

Exercises in groups is performed during Scoliosis In-patient Rehabilitation (SIR) in Germany and Barcelone, but also in Switzerland and Israel. The positive psychological impact on scoliosis patients who are rather alone with their deformity helps to cope with the disorder [8183].

Restoration of sagittal profile

This is an integral component '3D Autocorrection' [82].

Psychology

Psychological aspects play a key role in physiotherapy. The question is which methodology to be taken and whether PT's are the right professionals trained also in psychological direction. Anyway we have a good psychological impact from group sessions and therefore the question is whether to make specific group training a standard procedure in physical therapy of scoliosis [83].

Correction of contractures

When there are any, surely is of importance when contractures inhibit 3D correction, however not with high priority.

Proprioception

The use of proprioception, tactile stimulation to improve neurodynamics and self perception is important and is an integral part of many treatment programs to facilitate 3D correction [82, 83].

Patient and family education

Theoretical information for the patient and family is very important and should be given by physiotherapists as well as by the guiding physician. Generally, training of PT's in theory of scoliosis rehabilitation also is necessary [83].

Activities of daily living (ADL)

ADS is performed as a specialized module of treatment during SIR [81, 83, 86]. But this aim to address ADL should also follow a standardized methodology, perhaps as an addition to the aim to improve ergonomy.

Exercise and brace treatment

In brace-treated patients, exercises are not performed regularily in the centre of the senior author but their proposed importance, and the evidence to support this, should be discussed.

Awareness of the deformation

This important issue, also classified at 'self perception' is integrated into the Lyonaise Method [84, 85] and the Schroth programme [82, 83, 86] as a component of diagnosis and education, as well as a baseline for 'before and after' evaluation.

3.2.Postmeeting-questionaire (after the consensus meeting)

The results of the postmeeting-test changed slightly compared to the premeeting values (Table 2). The choice for highest priority for treatment aims were:

Autocorrection in 3D (97%),

Restoration of the sagittal alignment (67%),

ADL-training (83%),

Theoretical information to the patient (87%),

Stabilisation (87%).

Discussion

In 1941, a committee of the American Orthopaedic Association undertook a study of methods and results of treatment of idiopathic scoliosis, by interviewing clinicians at sixteen clinics in the United States [87]. Case histories of 425 patients, followed for >1 year after treatment, were evaluated. The goal of the study was to 'establish the present status of this condition, and to clarify, in so far as possible, what can be expected from the present methods of treatment.'

At that time, most clinics prescribed a regime of specialized exercises and/or surgery [87]. Short term results obtained with surgery and with exercise were similar, with little or no improvement obtained for most patients. Among 214 patients treated with spinal fusion, significant loss of correction occurred in 92% of patients, and in 30% of cases the curvature was the same or worse after surgery than before. Long term complications were not available but at short-term followup, the results in 69% of treated patients were rated as 'fair' or 'poor.' Among 185 patients treated with exercise at the 16 clinics surveyed, 69% either remained unchanged or increased by 5–15 degrees, 27% increased by ≥20 degrees, and one curve improved by >10 degrees. Questionnaires revealed that 'most men agree that postural improvement can be expected from a regime of exercises, but the curve itself cannot be decreased by this means.'

In the ensuing decades since this study was published, the routine use of exercise for patients in the United States was largely eliminated (e.g., 65–78). Meanwhile, an ongoing global effort to develop effective surgical methods is reflected in >10,000 peer reviewed articles published, in English, since 1950 and listed in Medline and other searches for scholarly articles. Unfortunately, the lack of success with exercise reported in 1941, unlike the failure of surgery, has not led to a corresponding effort to define improved methods for using physical therapy to treat patients with scoliosis: A parallel search of Medline reveals that fewer than 100 articles exploring the use of exercise-based approaches in the treatment of scoliosis in patients, of any age, have been published.

The routine use of exercise has remained central to therapeutic approaches in many countries [88]. To date, however, the body of literature available to patients and clinicians is of limited use [64]. The relatively limited literature in part reflects clinical traditions which have not placed a high priority on publication. Perhaps more important, a diversity of approaches, standards, and languages limits how accessible and interpretable the available information is to colleagues with common interests [64]: Among several hundred reports of clinical outcome published in recent decades (>600), no fewer than ten different languages were used. The establishment of a scientific society dedicated to research into scoliosis rehabilitation, and a venue for rigorous peer review of results from specialists, are critical first steps in defining the role of physical therapy in treatment of scoliosis.

Conclusion

A foundational meeting of SOSORT, a new international scientific society dedicated to research on scoliosis rehabilitation, met in Milan, Italy in January 2005. Questionnaires, given before and after the meeting, were used to explore current beliefs, approaches, and goals in clinical practice. The responses to the questionnaires show that, in principle, specialists in scoliosis physiotherapy do not disagree and that several features can be regarded, currently, as standard features in the rehabilitation of scoliosis patients. These features include autocorrection in 3D, training in ADL, stabilizing the corrected posture, and patient education. However, due to a lack of common standards and common terminology the meaning of some questions were understood quite differently. A priority for SOSORT will be to foster a common language and therapeutic standards among the international community specializing in conservative scoliosis management. With the establishment of a clinical and conceptual framework for communication and planning, multicenter studies can be designed to measure the short and long-term efficacy of these approaches in maintaining health and function in children diagnosed with scoliosis.

Notes

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Asklepios Katharina Schroth Spinal Deformities Rehabilitation Centre
(2)
ISICO (Italian Scientific Spine Institute)
(3)
University of Arizona
(4)
Instituto Èlena Salvá
(5)
University of Medical Sciences
(6)
Orthopaedic Department "Thriasion" General Hospital
(7)
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Teikyo University School of Medicine

References

  1. Ascani E, Bartolozzi P, Logroscino CA, Marchetti PG, Ponte A, Savini R, Travaglini F, Binazzi R, Di Silvestre M: Natural history of untreated IS after skeletal maturity. Spine. 1986, 11: 784-789.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Collis DK, Ponseti IV: Long-term follow-up of patients with IS scoliosis not treated surgically. J Bone Jt Surg. 1969, 51-A: 425-445.Google Scholar
  3. Fowles JV, Drummond DS, L'Ecuyer S, Roy L, Kassab MT: Untreated scoliosis in the adult. Clinical Orthop Related Res. 1978, 134: 212-22.Google Scholar
  4. Nachemson A: A long term follow-up study of nontreated scoliosis. Acta Orthop Scan. 1968, 39: 466-476.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Balague F, Dutoit G, Waldburger M: Low back pain in schoolchildren. An epidemiological study. Scandinavian J Rehab Med. 1988, 20: 175-179.Google Scholar
  6. Edgar MA: Back pain assessment from a long term follow-up of operated and unoperated patients with AIS. Spine. 1979, 4: 519-521.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB, Van Poortvliet JA, Phillips H: Influence of anthropometric factors and joint laxity in the incidence of adolescent back pain. Spine. 1984, 9: 461-464.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Kostuik JP, Bentivoglio J: The incidence of low back pain in adult scoliosis. Spine. 1981, 6: 268-273.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Jackson RP, Simmons EH, Stripinis D: Incidence and severity of back pain in adult idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 1983, 8: 749-756.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Mayo NE, Goldberg MS, Poitras B, Scott S, Hanley J: The Ste-Justine AIS cohort study. Part III: Back pain. Spine. 1994, 14: 1573-1581.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Nastasi AJ, Levine DB, Veliskakis KP: Pain patterns in AIS. J Bone Jt Surg. 1972, 54-A: 1575-Google Scholar
  12. Nilsonne U, Lundgren K: Long term prognosis in IS. Acta orthop Scandinav. 1968, 39: 456-465.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Ramirez N, Johnston CE, Browne RH: The prevalence of back pain in children who have IS. J Bone Jt Surg. 1997, 79-A: 364-368.Google Scholar
  14. Vitale MG, Levy DE, Johnson MG, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AJ, Roye BP, Verdisco L, Roye DP: Assessment of quality of life in adolescent patients with orthopedic problems: Are adult measures appropriate?. J Ped Orthop. 2001, 21: 622-628. 10.1097/00004694-200109000-00014.Google Scholar
  15. Weinstein SL, Zavala DC, Ponseti IV: Idiopathic scoliosis: long term follow-up and prognosis in untreated patients. J Bone Jt Surg. 1981, 63-A: 702-712.Google Scholar
  16. Goldberg MS, Mayo NE, Poitras B, Scott S, Hanley J: The Ste-Justine Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Cohort Study. Part II: Perception of health, self and body image, and participation in physical activities. Spine. 1994, 14: 1562-1572.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Spratt KF, Peterson KK, Spoonamore MJ, Ponseti IV: Health and function of patients with untreated IS: a 50-year natural history study. JAMA. 2003, 289: 559-567. 10.1001/jama.289.5.559.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Bishop C: Where are the missing elders? The decline in nursing home use, 1985–1995. Health Affairs. 1999, 18: 146-155. 10.1377/hlthaff.18.4.146.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Weinstein SL: Health and function with untreated scoliosis – reply. JAMA. 2003, 289: 2644-10.1001/jama.289.20.2644-b.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Deviren V, Berven S, Kleinstueck F, Antinnes J, Smith JA, Hu SS: Predictors of flexibility and pain patterns in thoracolumbar and lumbar IS. Spine. 2002, 27: 2346-2349. 10.1097/00007632-200211010-00007.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwab FJ, Smith VA, Biserni M, Gamez L, Farcy JP, Pagala M: Adult scoliosis:quantitative radiographic and clinical analysis. Spine. 2002, 27: 387-392. 10.1097/00007632-200202150-00012.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Chong KC, Letts RM, Cumming GR: Influence of spinal curvature on exercise capacity. J Ped Orthop. 1981, 1: 251-254.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. DiRocco P, Breed AL, Carlin JI, Reddan WG: Physical work capacity in adolescents with mild IS. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 1983, 64: 476-479.Google Scholar
  24. DiRocco P, Vaccaro P: Cardiopulmonary functioning in adolescent patients with mild IS. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 1988, 69: 198-199.Google Scholar
  25. Smyth RJ, Chapman KR, Wright TA, Crawford JS, Rebuck AS: Pulmonary function in adolescents with mild IS. Thorax. 1984, 39: 901-904.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Smyth RJ, Chapman KR, Wright TA, Crawford MD, Rebuck AS: Ventilatory patterns during hypoxia, hypercapnia, and exercise in adolescents with mild scoliosis. Pediatrics. 1986, 77: 692-696.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Szeinberg A, Canny GJ, Rashed N, Veneruso G, Levison H: Forced VC and maximal respiratory pressures in patients with mild and moderate scoliosis. Ped Pulmon. 1988, 4: 8-12.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Weber B, Smith JP, Briscoe WA, Friedman SA, King TKC: Pulmonary function in asymptomatic adolescents with IS. Am Rev Resp Dis. 1975, 111: 389-397.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Fraser RS, Muller NL, Colman N, Pare PD: Fraser and Pare's Diagnosis of Diseases of the Chest. 1999, Philadelphia: WB Saunders, FourthGoogle Scholar
  30. Murray JF, Nadel JA: Textbook of Respiratory Medicine. 2000, Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 3Google Scholar
  31. Branthwaite MA: Cardiorespiratory conequences of unfused IS. Br J Dis Chest. 1986, 80: 360-369. 10.1016/0007-0971(86)90089-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Davies G, Reid L: Effect of scoliosis on growth of alveoli and pulmonary arteries and on the right ventricle. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 1971, 46: 623-632.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Hitosugi M, Shigeta A, Takatsu A: An autopsy case of sudden death in a patient with IS. Medicine Science and the Law. 2000, 40: 175-178.Google Scholar
  34. Pehrsson K, Larsson S, Oden A, Nachemson A: Long term follow-up of patients with untreated scoliosis. A study of mortality, causes of death and symptoms. Spine. 1992, 17: 1091-1096.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Schneerson JM, Sutton GC, Zorab PA: Causes of death, right ventricular hypertrophy, and congenital heart disease in scoliosis. Clin Orth Rel Research. 1978, 135: 52-57.Google Scholar
  36. Dickson RA: Spinal deformity – AIS. Nonoperative treatment. Spine. 1999, 24: 2601-2606. 10.1097/00007632-199912150-00007.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Dickson RA, Weinstein SL: Bracing (and screening) – yes or no?. J Bone Jt Surg. 1999, 81-B: 193-198. 10.1302/0301-620X.81B2.9630.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Mannino DM, Buist AS, Petty TL, Enright PL, Redd SC: Lung function and mortality in the U.S.: data from the First National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey followup study. Thorax. 2003, 58: 388-393. 10.1136/thorax.58.5.388.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Karlson BW, Sjolin M, Lindqvist J, Caidahl K, Herlitz J: Ten-year mortality rate in relation to observations of a bicycle exercise test in patients with a suspected or confirmed ischemic event but no or only minor myocardial damage. American Heart Journal. 2001, 141: 977-984. 10.1067/mhj.2001.115437.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Myers J, Prakash M, Froelicher V, Do D, Partington S, Atwood JE: Exercise capacity and mortality among men referred for exercise testing. New England Journal of Medicine. 2002, 346: 793-801. 10.1056/NEJMoa011858.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Collis DK, Ponseti IV: Long-term follow-up of patients with IS scoliosis not treated surgically. J Bone Jt Surg. 1969, 51-A: 425-445.Google Scholar
  42. Drummond DS, Rogala E, Gurr J: Spinal deformity: Natural history and the role of screening. Orthop Clinics of NA. 1979, 10: 751-759.Google Scholar
  43. Weiss HR, Bickert W: Improvement of the parameters of right-heart stress evidenced by electrocardiographic examinations by the in-patient rehabilitation program according to Schroth in adult patients with scoliosis. Orthop Prax. 1996, 32: 450-453.Google Scholar
  44. Roaf R: Scoliosis. 1966, Baltimore: Williams and WilkinsGoogle Scholar
  45. Stokes IAF, Hueter-Volkmann : Effect. State of the Art Reviews. Spine. 2000, 14: 349-357.Google Scholar
  46. Stokes IAF, Gardner-Morse M: The role of muscles and effects of load on growth. Research into Spinal Deformity. 2002, 4: 314-317.Google Scholar
  47. Lonstein JE, Carlson JM: The prediction of curve progression in untreated idiopathic scoliosis during growth. J Bone Jt Surg [Am.]. 1994, 66: 1061-Google Scholar
  48. Weinstein SL: Natural history. Spine. 1999, 24: 2592-2600. 10.1097/00007632-199912150-00006.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Bjerkreim R, Hassan I: Progression in untreated IS after the end of growth. Acta Orthop Scand. 1982, 53: 897-900.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Weinstein SL, Ponseti IV: Curve progression in IS. Bone Jt Surg. 1983, 65-A: 447-455.Google Scholar
  51. Lonstein JE, Winter RB: AIS: Nonoperative treatment. Orth Clinics NA. 1988, 19: 239-245.Google Scholar
  52. Weiss HR: The effect of an exercise programme on VC and rib mobility in patients with IS. Spine. 1991, 16: 88-93.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Weiss HR, Bickert W: Improvement of the parameters of right-heart stress evidenced by electrocardiographic examinations by the in-patient rehabilitation program according to Schroth in adult patients with scoliosis. Orthop Prax. 1996, 32: 450-453.Google Scholar
  54. Weiss HR: Scoliosis related pain in adults – treatment influences. Eur J Phys Med and Rehab. 1993, 3: 91-94.Google Scholar
  55. Weiss HR, Verres C, Lohschmidt K, El Obeidi N: Pain and scoliosis – is there any relationship?. Orthop Prax. 1998, 34: 602-606.Google Scholar
  56. Ferraro C, Masiero S, Venturin A: Effect of exercise therapy on mild idiopathic scoliosis. Preliminary result. Europa Medico Physica. 1998, 34: 25-31.Google Scholar
  57. Rigo M, Quera-Salva G, Puigdevall N: Effect of the exclusive employment of physiotherapy in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Proceedings Book III of the 11th International Congress ofthe World Confederation for Physical Therapy:July28th – August 2nd. 1991. 1991, London, Chartered Society of Physiotherapists, 1319-1321.Google Scholar
  58. Weiss HR: Influence of an in-patient exercise program on scoliotic curve. Italian Journal of Orthopedics and Traumatology. 1992, 18: 395-406.Google Scholar
  59. Weiss HR, Lohschmidt K, El Obeidi N, Verres C: Preliminary results and worst-case analysis of in-patient scoliosis rehabilitation. Ped Rehab. 1997, 1: 35-40.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  60. Stone B, Beekman C, Hall V, Guess V, Brooks HL: The effect of an exercise program on change in curve in adolescents with minimal idiopathic scoliosis. A preliminary study. Physical Therapy. 1979, 59: 759-763.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Den Boer WA, Anderson PG, Limbeek : Treatment of idiopathic scoliosis with side-sthift therapy: an initial comparison with a brace treatment historical cohort. Eur Spine J. 1999, 8: 406-410. 10.1007/s005860050195.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Weiss HR, Lohschmidt K, El Obeidi N, Verres C: Preliminary results and worst-case analysis of inpatient scoliosis rehabilitation. Ped Rehab. 1997, 1: 35-40.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  63. Weiss HR, Weiss G, Petermann F: Incidence of curvature progression in idiopathic scoliosis patients treated with scoliosis in-patient rehabilitation (SIR): an age- and sex-matched controlled study. Ped Rehab. 2003, 6: 23-30. 10.1080/1363849031000095288.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  64. Negrini S, Antonini G, Carabalona R, Minozzi S: Physical exercises as a treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A systematic review. Ped Rehab. 2003, 6: 227-235. 10.1080/13638490310001636781.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  65. Bleck E: AIS. Developmental Med Child Neurol. 1991, 33: 167-176.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  66. Boachie-Adjei O, Onner B: Spinal Deformity (Common Orthopedic Problems I). Ped Clinics NA. 1996, 43: 883-897. 10.1016/S0031-3955(05)70440-5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  67. Bunnell WP: Nonoperative treatment of spinal Deformity ofspinal Deformity: the case for observation. Instructional Course Lectures. 1985, 34: 106-109.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Farady JA: Current principles in the nonoperative management of structural AIS. Physical Therapy. 1983, 63: 512-523.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Haasbeek JF: AIS; recognizing patients who need treatment. Postgraduate Medicine. 1997, 101: 207-216.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Kaelin DL, Oh TH, Lim PAC: Rehabilitation of orthopedic and rheumatologic disorders. 4. Musculoskeletal disorders. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2000, 81: 73-77. 10.1053/apmr.2000.0810s73.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  71. Killian JT, Mayberry S, Wilkinson L: Current concepts in AIS. Pediatric Annals. 1999, 28: 755-761.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Leatherman K, Dickson R: The Management of Spinal Deformities. 1988, London, Boston, Singapore, Sydney, Toronto, Wellington: Wright PressGoogle Scholar
  73. Lonstein JE: AIS. Lancet. 1994, 344: 1407-1412. 10.1016/S0140-6736(94)90572-X.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Lonstein JE: Patient Evaluation. Moe's Textbook of Scoliosis and Other Spinal Deformities. Edited by: Lonstein JE, Bradford D, Winter R, Oglivie J. 1995, Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 45-86. 3Google Scholar
  75. Reamy BV, Slakey JB: AIS: review and current concepts. American Family Physician. 2001, 64: 111-116.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Rinsky LA: Advances in management of IS. Hospital Practice. 1992, 49-55.Google Scholar
  77. Rinsky LA, Gamble JG: AIS. Western J Med. 1988, 148: 182-191.Google Scholar
  78. Roach JW: Disorders of the pediatric and adolescent spine. Orthop Clinics NA. 1999, 30: 353-65. 10.1016/S0030-5898(05)70092-4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  79. Hawes M: The use of exercise in the treatment of scoliosis: an evidence-based critial review of the literature. Ped Rehab. 2003, 6: 171-18. 10.1080/0963828032000159202.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  80. Focarile FA, Bonaldi A, Giarolo M: Effectiveness of nonsurgical treatment for IS; overview of available evidence. Spine. 1991, 16: 395-401.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Freidel K, Petermann F, Reichel D, Steiner A, Warschburger P, Weiss HR: Quality of life in women with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2002, 15: 87-91. 10.1097/00007632-200202150-00013.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  82. Weiss HR, Rigo M: Fisiotherapia para la Escoliosis (Basada en el diagnóstico). 2004, Paidotribo, BarceloneGoogle Scholar
  83. Weiss HR: La rehabilitatión de la escoliosis. 2003, Paidotribo, BarceloneGoogle Scholar
  84. Negrini A: Die Idiopathische Skoliose des Adoleszenten – Wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse und Behandlungsverfahren [abstract of a paper read at the 17th. GEKTS meeting Louvain, Belgium 1989]. Wirbelsäulendeformitäten. Edited by: Weiss HR. 1991, Heidelberg: Springer, 1: 88-Google Scholar
  85. Truchi P: Die muskuläre „Wachsamkeit” in den Übungen für Skoliosepatienten [abstract of a paper read at the 17th. GEKTS meeting Louvain, Belgium 1989]. Wirbelsäulendeformitäten. Edited by: Weiss HR. 1991, Heidelberg: Springer, 1: 89-Google Scholar
  86. Lehnert-Schroth Ch: Dreidimensionale Skoliosebehandlung. 2000, Stuttgart: Urban & Fischer, 6Google Scholar
  87. Shands AR, Barr JS, Colonna PC, Noall L: End-result study of the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. Report of the Research Committee of the American Orthopedic Association. J Bone Jt Surg. 1941, 23-A: 963-977.Google Scholar
  88. Moen KY, Nachemson AL: Treatment of scoliosis: an historical perspective. Spine. 1999, 24: 2570-2575. 10.1097/00007632-199912150-00003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Weiss et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.