Volume 8 Supplement 1

9th International Conference on Conservative Management of Spinal Deformities - SOSORT 2012 Annual Meeting

Open Access

Different material for the SPORT concept brace: short term comparison of Sforzesco and Sibilla brace

  • F Zaina1,
  • S Donzelli1,
  • M Lusini2 and
  • S Negrini3, 4
Scoliosis20138(Suppl 1):O39

https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-8-S1-O39

Published: 3 June 2013

Background

SPoRT braces include the Sforzesco and the Sibilla Brace. The difference in the two consists in the material; Sforzesco is more rigid, and thus used in more severe and rigid curves.

Aim

To compare the short term results of the Sforzesco and the Sibilla to check the influence of the material.

Methods

Design: retrospective pre-post study. Protocol: in our database we searched for all patients who were prescribed a Sibilla, or Sforzesco Brace, 21h per day or more for AIS, 30-35° Cobb, more than 10 years old at first evaluation, and no previous brace treatment. We compared data from the last visit before beginning the brace, and the first visit after 6 months of brace treatment. Sforzesco group (SF-G): 78 patients (10 males), age13.6±1.6, 32.9±1.9° Cobb, TRACE 6; 5-8 (median, IQ), ATR 10.8±3° Bunnell, Risser 0.5; 0-2 (median, IQ), BMI 19.24. Sibilla Group (SI-G): 44 patients (5 males), age 12.6±1.6, 32.1±1.6° Cobb, TRACE 6.56; 5.44-7, ATR 9.4±2.9° Bunnell, Risser 2; 1-3, BMI 19.34. Outcome measure: Cobb angle, TRACE, ATR. Statistical Analysis: ANOVA, Chi Square, P<0.05.

Results

The SF-G had statistically significant larger curves, and larger ATR, more rigid spines, and slightly older, but the difference was not clinically relevant. The average wearing hour for the brace was 20 h for both groups. Both groups improved the Cobb angle (26.4° Sforzesco vs 25.2° Sibilla), TRACE (3.34 vs 4) and ATR (7.6 vs 6.1). No difference was statistically significant. Rigidity, BMI, ATR and initial Risser didn't affect the Cobb correction.

Conclusion

Both SpoRT braces can improve curves between 30-35° in the short term. No differences have been noticed, so we can conclude that in this population the rigidity of the material doesn't affect the result. It's possible that for larger curves the difference would be more relevant, but we need further studies to verify.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
ISICO (Italian Scientific Spine Institute)
(2)
Siena University
(3)
University of Brescia
(4)
IRCCS Don Gnocchi

References

  1. Negrini S, Atanasio S, Negrini F, Zaina F, Marchini G: The Sforzesco brace can replace cast in the correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A controlled prospective cohort study. Scoliosis. 2008, 3 (1): 15-10.1186/1748-7161-3-15.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Zaina F, Negrini S, Fusco C, Atanasio S: How to improve aesthetics in patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS): a SPoRT brace treatment according to SOSORT management criteria. Scoliosis. 2009, 4: 18-10.1186/1748-7161-4-18.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Zaina F, Fusco C, Atanasio S, Negrini S: The SPoRT concept of bracing for idiopathic scoliosis. Physiother Theory Pract. 2011, 27 (1): 54-60. 10.3109/09593985.2010.503988.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Zaina et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013

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.

Advertisement