Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Schroth and bracing show a trend toward better short-term Cobb angle control in adolescent idiopathic scoliosisBracing and Schroth Training Show Promise for Scoliosis Control

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that bracing and Schroth-related therapies show a trend toward better short-term Cobb angle control in AIS.

This network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of multiple non-surgical interventions, including Schroth training, bracing, scoliosis-specific exercises, core stabilization, and traditional Chinese medicine rehabilitation, for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. The study included 709 patients to assess Cobb angle and SRS-22 outcomes.

The analysis reported a pooled SMD of -1.39 (95% CI: -2.20 to -0.59) for Cobb angle improvement. Specifically, bracing and Schroth-related therapies demonstrated a trend toward better short-term Cobb angle control. However, evidence regarding the SRS-22 outcome was noted as limited and exploratory.

Several limitations were identified, including high heterogeneity (I2 = 95.1%), a sparse evidence network, and imprecise estimates. Potential small-study effects may also impact the results. Consequently, the superiority of bracing and Schroth-related therapies is only a trend due to the sparse network, and SRS-22 evidence remains insufficient.

Clinically, some non-surgical interventions may improve Cobb angle in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. While bracing and Schroth-related therapies show a trend toward relative superiority for short-term Cobb angle control, the high heterogeneity and sparse data necessitate cautious interpretation of these findings in clinical practice.

How this fits prior evidence

This meta-analysis extends previous findings that bracing and physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises are confirmed effective for scoliosis in children and adolescents. It also builds upon evidence that Schroth training shows Cobb angle improvement (SMD -0.52) and that combined Chinese massage and Schroth therapy may improve outcomes. This study specifically highlights a trend toward better short-term Cobb angle control with bracing and Schroth-related therapies, though it notes the evidence for SRS-22 remains insufficient.

Researchers looked at different ways to manage idiopathic scoliosis in teenagers. They compared several methods, including bracing, Schroth training, core stabilization, and traditional Chinese medicine. The study included data from 709 patients to see which methods helped improve the Cobb angle, which is a measure of the spinal curve.

The results showed that bracing and Schroth-related therapies had a trend toward better short-term control of the Cobb angle. However, the researchers noted that the evidence for other measures, like the SRS-22 score, was limited and not enough to make a firm conclusion.

It is important to note that these findings come from a complex analysis where many factors made the results hard to interpret precisely. Because the data was varied and some parts were not very clear, these results should be viewed with caution. Talk to a specialist to see which treatment plan is best for a specific case.

What this means for you:
Bracing and Schroth training show a trend toward better short-term Cobb angle control in adolescents with scoliosis.

Common questions

What is the Cobb angle and how does it relate to scoliosis?

The Cobb angle is a measurement used to determine the degree of curvature in the spine. In this study of 709 patients, researchers looked at how different treatments, like bracing and Schroth training, could help control this angle in teenagers with idiopathic scoliosis.

Are bracing and Schroth training more effective than other methods?

The study showed a trend toward better short-term Cobb angle control for bracing and Schroth-related therapies compared to other methods. However, because the data was varied and the network was sparse, these results should be interpreted cautiously by patients and doctors.

Is there enough evidence to use the SRS-22 score for treatment?

The evidence for the SRS-22 score was found to be limited and exploratory. Because the data was insufficient, this specific measure cannot yet be used to clearly determine the effectiveness of different scoliosis treatments.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedSep 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BackgroundAdolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common three-dimensional spinal deformity. Non-surgical interventions are important for controlling curve progression and maintaining quality of life, but their comparative effectiveness remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo compare the effects of commonly used non-surgical interventions for AIS on Cobb angle and SRS-22 outcomes through a systematic review and network meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and major Chinese databases were searched from inception to April 4, 2026. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing non-surgical interventions and reporting Cobb angle or SRS-22 were included for the primary network meta-analysis. Prospective non-randomized studies served as supplementary evidence. Effect sizes were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Ranking was assessed using SUCRA, interpreted cautiously with heterogeneity and evidence sparsity.ResultsThirteen comparative studies (709 AIS subjects) were included (10 RCTs, 3 non-randomized). Interventions included Schroth training, bracing, scoliosis-specific exercises, core stabilization, and traditional Chinese medicine rehabilitation. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis showed a pooled SMD of −1.39 (95% CI: −2.20 to −0.59) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 95.1%). Network ranking suggested that bracing and Schroth-related therapies had a trend toward better short-term Cobb angle control, but most estimates were imprecise and the evidence network was sparse. Evidence on SRS-22 was limited and exploratory.ConclusionSome non-surgical interventions may improve Cobb angle in AIS; bracing and Schroth-related therapies show a trend toward relative superiority for short-term Cobb angle control. However, due to sparse networks, high heterogeneity, and potential small-study effects, results should be interpreted cautiously and not solely based on SUCRA rankings. SRS-22 evidence remains insufficient. High-quality RCTs with longer follow-up are needed.Systematic Review RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42024546325.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.