↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of the Rigo Chêneau versus Boston-style orthoses for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a retrospective study

Overview of attention for article published in Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
12 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Effectiveness of the Rigo Chêneau versus Boston-style orthoses for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a retrospective study
Published in
Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13013-017-0117-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miriam K. Minsk, Kristen D. Venuti, Gail L. Daumit, Paul D. Sponseller

Abstract

Bracing can effectively treat adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), but patient outcomes have not been compared by brace type. We compared outcomes of AIS patients treated with Rigo Chêneau orthoses (RCOs) or custom-molded Boston-style thoracolumbosacral orthoses (TLSOs). We retrospectively reviewed patient records from one scoliosis center from 1999 through 2014. Patients were studied from initial treatment until skeletal maturity or surgery. Inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of AIS, initial major curve between 25° and 40°, use of an RCO or TLSO, and no previous scoliosis treatment. The study included 108 patients (93 girls) with a mean (±standard deviation) age at brace initiation of 12.5 ± 1.3 years. Thirteen patients wore an RCO, and 95 wore a TLSO. Mean pre-bracing major curves were 32.7° ± 4.8° in the RCO group and 31.4° ± 4.4° in the TLSO group (p = 0.387). Mean brace wear time was similar between groups. Mean differences in major curve from baseline to follow-up were -0.4° ± 9.9° in the RCO group and 6.9° ± 12.1° in the TLSO group (p = 0.028). Percent changes in major curve from baseline to follow-up were 0.0% ± 30.5% for the RCO group and 21.3% ± 38.8% for the TLSO group (p = 0.030). No RCO patients and 34% of TLSO patients progressed to spinal surgery (p = 0.019). At follow-up, major curves improved by 6° or more in 31% of the RCO group and 13% of the TLSO group (p = 0.100). Patients treated with RCOs compared with Boston-style TLSOs had similar baseline characteristics and brace wear time yet significantly lower rates of spinal surgery. Patients with RCOs also had lower mean and percent major curve progression versus those with TLSOs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 24%
Other 10 10%
Student > Master 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Researcher 5 5%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 31 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 16%
Engineering 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 35 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2018.
All research outputs
#3,575,275
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders
#9
of 97 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,482
of 309,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 97 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,705 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.