Plaszewski Maciej, Nowobilski Roman, Kowalski Pawel, Cieslinski Maciej
Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Institute of Physiotherapy, Warsaw University School of Physical Education, Akademicka, Biala Podlaska, Poland.
Int J Rehabil Res. 2012 Mar;35(1):13-9. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0b013e32834df622.
Idiopathic scoliosis affects 2-3% of adolescents. Large, progressing deformities, mostly present in girls, may lead to pulmonary complications, pain symptoms, the feeling of social isolation, and even mental disorders. The correlation of screening programs with surgery rate reduction and the clinical effectiveness of bracing remain a matter of debate. Critics indicate overdetection, qualification for therapy of insignificant curves, unjustified treatment, and risks of psychological side effects, whereas supporters underline the need for screening, and suggest improvements. It remains unclear whether such opposite opinions are based on sound evidence. To identify relevant studies, guidelines, and recommendations, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The levels of evidence presented in selected studies and grading of recommendations reported in available guidelines and recommendation statements were assessed using the SIGN scoring system. Screening programs are legislated, recommended, or not recommended in different American states. British and Canadian screening recommendations do not mention scoliosis; Australian boards recommend against scoliosis screening programs. Other publications such as Singapore, Turkish, and Malaysian publications underline the cost-effectiveness and clinical importance of the procedures. Different Greek authors postulate the benefits and harms caused by the programs to many schoolchildren. Such a polarity illustrates the topicality of the quality of scientific evidence analyses and the significance of the grading of the recommendations process. It appears that critical opinions often result from implementing such analyses, whereas those supporting the programs tend to value the importance of expert opinions.
特发性脊柱侧弯影响2%至3%的青少年。严重且进展性的畸形大多出现在女孩身上,可能导致肺部并发症、疼痛症状、社交孤立感,甚至精神障碍。筛查项目与手术率降低之间的相关性以及支具治疗的临床效果仍是一个有争议的问题。批评者指出存在过度检测、对轻微侧弯进行治疗的资格认定、不合理的治疗以及心理副作用风险,而支持者则强调筛查的必要性并建议改进。目前尚不清楚这些相反的观点是否有充分的证据支持。为了识别相关研究、指南和建议,我们检索了MEDLINE、谷歌学术和考克兰图书馆数据库。使用SIGN评分系统评估所选研究中呈现的证据水平以及现有指南和建议声明中报告的推荐分级。在美国不同州,筛查项目有的被立法规定、有的被推荐、有的则不被推荐。英国和加拿大的筛查建议未提及脊柱侧弯;澳大利亚委员会不建议开展脊柱侧弯筛查项目。其他出版物,如新加坡、土耳其和马来西亚的出版物则强调了这些程序的成本效益和临床重要性。不同的希腊作者推测了这些项目给许多学童带来的益处和危害。这种两极分化说明了科学证据分析质量的紧迫性以及推荐分级过程的重要性。似乎批判性意见往往源于进行此类分析,而支持这些项目的人则倾向于重视专家意见的重要性。