Literature DB >> 15082985

The influence of spine and trunk deformity on preoperative idiopathic scoliosis patients' health-related quality of life questionnaire responses.

Marc Asher1, Sue Min Lai, Doug Burton, Barbara Manna.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective case series.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the influence of spine and trunk deformity on preoperative idiopathic scoliosis patients' health-related quality of life questionnaire responses. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Management recommendations for patients with idiopathic scoliosis during adolescence are based heavily on spine deformity and to some extent trunk deformity magnitude. However, the manner in which these objective measures influence the patients' perception of their condition is unclear.
METHODS: Of 67 consecutive preoperative patients, 61 (91%) had completed the Scoliosis Research Society-22 health-related quality of life questionnaire and had been studied with posterior exposure surface topography. Their average age was 15 years, 6 months (range 10 years, 10 months-20 years, 10 months), and the average maximum Cobb was 63 degrees (range 40-137 degrees). Correlations between spine and trunk deformity measures and Scoliosis Research Society-22 scores were determined by the Pearson correlation coefficient, with P < 0.01 considered significant.
RESULTS: For the study group, spine deformity (Cobb) correlated significantly only with Scoliosis Research Society-22 function (r = -0.39, P = 0.0022) domain. Neither coronal nor transverse plane trunk deformity composite scores correlated with any Scoliosis Research Society-22 scores. The Hump Index component of the transverse plane Suzuki Hump Sum composite score was the only trunk measurement to correlate significantly (function r = -0.45, P = 0.003; self image, r = -0.36, P = 0.0040). The strongest correlations occurred when the single thoracic curves, King classifications III and IV, were combined: Cobb versus function r = -0.53, P = 0.0027; Cobb versus self-image r = -0.46, P = 0.0099; and Hump Index versus function r = -0.60, P = 0.0005. There were no significant correlations between either spine deformity or any trunk deformity measure with Scoliosis Research Society-22 responses for either the double or thoracolumbar curve pattern groups.
CONCLUSION: Both spine and upper thoracic transverse plane trunk deformity significantly influenced preoperative idiopathic scoliosis patients' perception of function and self-image, but not pain or mental health. However, in spite of a fairly rigorous standard of proof, P < or = 0.01, the significant r values ranged from -0.33 to -0.68, suggesting that there are factors other than spine and trunk deformity influencing the idiopathic scoliosis patients' health-related quality of life questionnaire responses. Future studies are necessary to define these factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15082985     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200404150-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  23 in total

1.  Do postoperative radiographically verified technical success, improved cosmesis, and trunk shift corroborate with patient-reported outcomes in Lenke 1C adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?

Authors:  Shallu Sharma; Cody Eric Bünger; Thomas Andersen; Haolin Sun; Chunsen Wu; Ebbe Stender Hansen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  The body image disturbance questionnaire-scoliosis better correlates to quality of life measurements than the spinal assessment questionnaire in pediatric idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Jennifer M Bauer
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2021-04-30

3.  Effect of surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis on the quality of life: a prospective study with a minimum 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Massimo Mariconda; Claudia Andolfi; Simone Cerbasi; Valeria Servodidio
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Postoperative trunk shift in Lenke 1 and 2 curves: how common is it? and analysis of risk factors.

Authors:  Per D Trobisch; Amer F Samdani; Joshua M Pahys; Patrick J Cahill
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Minimum 10 years follow-up surgical results of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients treated with TSRH instrumentation.

Authors:  I Teoman Benli; Bülent Ates; Serdar Akalin; Mehmet Citak; Alper Kaya; Ahmet Alanay
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-08-19       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  The Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS): a new tool to evaluate subjective impression of trunk deformity in patients with idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Juan Bago; Judith Sanchez-Raya; Francisco Javier Sanchez Perez-Grueso; Jose Maria Climent
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2010-03-25

7.  A review of the trunk surface metrics used as Scoliosis and other deformities evaluation indices.

Authors:  Petros Patias; Theodoros B Grivas; Angelos Kaspiris; Costas Aggouris; Evangelos Drakoutos
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2010-06-29

8.  Validity and reliability of photographic measures to evaluate waistline asymmetry in idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Antonia Matamalas; Juan Bagó; Elisabetta D Agata; Ferran Pellisé
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Pain and disability correlated with disc degeneration via magnetic resonance imaging in scoliosis patients.

Authors:  Glenn R Buttermann; William J Mullin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Decision-making factors in the treatment of adult spinal deformity.

Authors:  Takashi Fujishiro; Louis Boissière; Derek Thomas Cawley; Daniel Larrieu; Olivier Gille; Jean-Marc Vital; Ferran Pellisé; Francisco Javier Sanchez Pérez-Grueso; Frank Kleinstück; Emre Acaroglu; Ahmet Alanay; Ibrahim Obeid
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.