ArticleSpine deformity2025
The evolution of telehealth in early-onset scoliosis care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Spine deformity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Wearable Devices in Scoliosis Treatment: A Scoping Review of Innovations and Challenges.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the adoption and sustained use of telehealth for managing early-onset scoliosis (EOS) during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsA 35-question anonymous survey was emailed to 191 physician members of an international pediatric spine research group.
resultsNinety seven clinicians completed the survey (51%). Of the 78% who reported that they currently use telehealth for EOS patients, 44% do so rarely; 21% do not use telehealth at all for EOS patients. Pre-pandemic, 37% used telehealth, increasing to 93% during the pandemic, with 40% using telehealth for most visits and 33% for a quarter of visits (p < 0.001). Post-pandemic usage was significantly higher than pre-pandemic levels (p < 0.001). Bracing was the favored treatment to monitor via telehealth (61% of respondents). Minor curves and initial post-op visits were ranked as the most suitable for remote care (77% of respondents). Geography and transport issues were the most cited drivers of telehealth (71% and 57% of respondents, respectively). No specific subset of EOS was particularly suitable for telehealth. The most common exam techniques used via telehealth included back inspection (88%), observing gait/posture (58%), and Adams test (46%).
conclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic saw a significant increase in telehealth services for EOS patients (p < 0.001). While most patients returned to in-person visits post-pandemic, a significant number continued to use telehealth, especially when compared to pre-pandemic (p < 0.001). This persistent use, particularly for patients treated with bracing and to monitor minor curves, highlights the opportunity to optimize EOS care by strategically blending telemedicine with conventional clinic visits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39673678What 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.