↓ Skip to main content

2016 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth

Overview of attention for article published in Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
49 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
549 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1258 Mendeley
Title
2016 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth
Published in
Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13013-017-0145-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefano Negrini, Sabrina Donzelli, Angelo Gabriele Aulisa, Dariusz Czaprowski, Sanja Schreiber, Jean Claude de Mauroy, Helmut Diers, Theodoros B. Grivas, Patrick Knott, Tomasz Kotwicki, Andrea Lebel, Cindy Marti, Toru Maruyama, Joe O’Brien, Nigel Price, Eric Parent, Manuel Rigo, Michele Romano, Luke Stikeleather, James Wynne, Fabio Zaina

Abstract

The International Scientific Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) produced its first guidelines in 2005 and renewed them in 2011. Recently published high-quality clinical trials on the effect of conservative treatment approaches (braces and exercises) for idiopathic scoliosis prompted us to update the last guidelines' version. The objective was to align the guidelines with the new scientific evidence to assure faster knowledge transfer into clinical practice of conservative treatment for idiopathic scoliosis (CTIS). Physicians, researchers and allied health practitioners working in the area of CTIS were involved in the development of the 2016 guidelines. Multiple literature reviews reviewing the evidence on CTIS (assessment, bracing, physiotherapy, physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) and other CTIS) were conducted. Documents, recommendations and practical approach flow charts were developed using a Delphi procedure. The process was completed with the Consensus Session held during the first combined SOSORT/IRSSD Meeting held in Banff, Canada, in May 2016. The contents of the new 2016 guidelines include the following: background on idiopathic scoliosis, description of CTIS approaches for various populations with flow-charts for clinical practice, as well as literature reviews and recommendations on assessment, bracing, PSSE and other CTIS. The present guidelines include a total of 68 recommendations divided into following topics: bracing (n = 25), PSSE to prevent scoliosis progression during growth (n = 12), PSSE during brace treatment and surgical therapy (n = 6), other conservative treatments (n = 2), respiratory function and exercises (n = 3), general sport activities (n = 6); and assessment (n = 14). According to the agreed strength and level of evidence rating scale, there were 2 recommendations on bracing and 1 recommendation on PSSE that reached level of recommendation "I" and level of evidence "II". Three recommendations reached strength of recommendation A based on the level of evidence I (2 for bracing and one for assessment); 39 recommendations reached strength of recommendation B (20 for bracing, 13 for PSSE, and 6 for assessment).The number of paper for each level of evidence for each treatment is shown in Table 8. The 2016 SOSORT guidelines were developed based on the current evidence on CTIS. Over the last 5 years, high-quality evidence has started to emerge, particularly in the areas of efficacy of bracing (one large multicentre trial) and PSSE (three single-centre randomized controlled trials). Several grade A recommendations were presented. Despite the growing high-quality evidence, the heterogeneity of the study protocols limits generalizability of the recommendations. There is a need for standardization of research methods of conservative treatment effectiveness, as recognized by SOSORT and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) non-operative management Committee.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 1,258 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1258 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 197 16%
Student > Master 102 8%
Other 79 6%
Researcher 79 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 5%
Other 196 16%
Unknown 543 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 269 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 186 15%
Sports and Recreations 44 3%
Engineering 43 3%
Unspecified 21 2%
Other 116 9%
Unknown 579 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 124. 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 01 October 2023.
All research outputs
#327,978
of 24,991,957 outputs
Outputs from Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders
#3
of 97 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,688
of 455,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,991,957 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% 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 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 455,031 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.