| Title |
Effectiveness of braces designed using computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and finite element simulation compared to CAD/CAM only for the conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-016-4434-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
N. Cobetto, C. E. Aubin, S. Parent, J. Clin, S. Barchi, I. Turgeon, Hubert Labelle |
| Abstract |
Clinical assessment of immediate in-brace effect of braces designed using CAD/CAM and FEM vs. only CAD/CAM for conservative treatment of AIS, using a randomized blinded and controlled study design. Forty AIS patients were prospectively recruited and randomized into two groups. For 19 patients (control group), the brace was designed using a scan of patient's torso and a conventional CAD/CAM approach (CtrlBrace). For the 21 other patients (test group), the brace was additionally designed using finite element modeling (FEM) and 3D reconstructions of spine, rib cage and pelvis (NewBrace). The NewBrace design was simulated and iteratively optimized to maximize the correction and minimize the contact surface and material. Both groups had comparable age, sex, weight, height, curve type and severity. Scoliosis Research Society standardized criteria for bracing were followed. Average Cobb angle prior to bracing was 27° and 28° for main thoracic (MT) and lumbar (L) curves, respectively, for the control group, while it was 33° and 28° for the test group. CtrlBraces reduced MT and L curves by 8° (29 %) and 10° (40 %), respectively, compared to 14° (43 %) and 13° (46 %) for NewBraces, which were simulated with a difference inferior to 5°. NewBraces were 50 % thinner and had 20 % less covering surface than CtrlBraces. Braces designed with CAD/CAM and 3D FEM simulation were more efficient and lighter than standard CAD/CAM TLSO's at first immediate in-brace evaluation. These results suggest that long-term effect of bracing in AIS may be improved using this new platform for brace fabrication. NCT02285621. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 119 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 13% |
| Researcher | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 17% |
| Unknown | 26 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 33 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 13% |
| Unknown | 26 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 May 2023.
All research outputs
#7,050,291
of 23,764,938 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#838
of 4,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,735
of 404,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#21
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,764,938 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,868 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 404,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.