ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Can Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing Integrating with/without Biomechanical Simulation Improve the Effectiveness of Spinal Braces on Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis?
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A scoping review of published reviews on the use of bracing in scoliosis.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- A novel spinal orthosis with embedded shape memory alloy for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Article
- Brace Dose in Scoliosis: Measurement, Monitoring, and Clinical Decision-Making-A Narrative Review.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2026Review
- Advances in prosthetics and orthotics.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The CAD/CAM technology has been increasingly popular in manufacturing spinal braces for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) in clinics. However, whether the CAD/CAM-manufactured braces or the CAD/CAM-manufactured braces integrating with biomechanical simulation could improve the in-brace correction angle of spinal braces in AIS patients, compared to the manually manufactured braces, has remained unclear. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the in-brace correction angle of (1) computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)-manufactured braces or (2) the CAD/CAM-manufactured braces integrating with biomechanical simulation with that of (3) manually manufactured braces. The Web of Science, OVID, EBSCO, PUBMED, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies published up to March 2023. Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or randomized controlled crossover trials were included for qualitative synthesis, and four of them were included for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis effect sizes of the in-brace correction angle for CAD/CAM versus manual method, and CAD/CAM integrating with biomechanical simulation versus the manual method in the thoracic curve group and the thoracolumbar/lumbar curve group were 0.6° (mean difference [MD], 95% confidence intervals [CI]: -1.06° to 2.25°), 1.12° (MD, 95% CI: -8.43° to 10.67°), and 3.96° (MD, 95% CI: 1.16° to 6.76°), respectively. This review identified that the braces manufactured by CAD/CAM integrating with biomechanical simulation did not show sufficient advantages over the manually manufactured braces, and the CAD/CAM-manufactured braces may not be considered as more worthwhile than the manually manufactured braces, based on the in-brace correction angle. More high-quality clinical studies that strictly follow the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) guidelines with long-term follow-ups are still needed to draw more solid conclusions and recommendations for clinical practice in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.