Table 3.
Result summary
| Study | Study period | Exercise compliance | Outcome measurements | Results | Evaluation of interaction effects | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cobb | Trunk asymmetry | QoL | Others | Age | Bone maturity | Curve magnitudes | Exercise compliance | ||||
| Liu et al.a,b[40] | 2.08 years | Not Reported | √ | × | × | × |
1.Significant Cobb reduction (6.8 ± 5.5° vs 1.5 ± 4.8°, p < 0.01) between the group A (age < 10 years, Risser 0) and the group C (age > 13 years, Risser 3). 2. Significant Cobb reduction was noted in subjects aged 10–12 (3.1 ± 4.2°). |
Yes (* < 13 years) | Yes (*Risser: 0) | Unknown | N/A |
| Yagci et al. [46, 47] | 4 months |
Study: 64% Control:62% |
√ |
√ ATR POTSI WRVS |
√ SRS-22 (initial mean: 4.0) |
× |
1. D-value of Cobb: −5.3 ± 2.2° vs −4.8 ± 2.6° in thoracic; − 4.1 ± 2.5° vs − 3.5 ± 3.0 in lumbar; P > 0.05 between groups. 1. No difference of ATR, POTSI, WRVAS between groups. 2. Pain domain was only improved in the control group (4.7 vs 4.3). |
Unknown | Unknown |
Yes No difference |
Unknown |
| Yagci et al.a,b [46, 47] | 10 weeks |
Study:69% Control:88% |
√ |
√ ATR POTSI WRVS |
√ SRS-22 (initial mean:3.9) |
× |
1. Significant difference of D-value in Thoracic Cobb reduction between groups (− 7.33 ± 2.78° vs 0.63 ± 4.34°). 2. Body asymmetry was only improved in the study group (ATR: −4.3 vs − 4.2). 3. SRS-22 was unchanged in both groups. |
Unknown | Unknown | Yes (* Thoracic) | Unknown |
| Zheng et al.a [48] | 1 year |
Study: 59 ± 0.2% Control: 58 ± 0.27% |
√ |
√ Shoulder-balance TAPS ATI |
√ SRS-22 (initial mean:4.2) |
× |
1. Greater Cobb reduction in the bracing group (5.58 ± 6.37° vs 2.24 ± 3.19°). 2. Shoulder balance was only improved in the bracing group. 3. Significant difference of functional domain (4.9 vs 4.7), mental domain (4.5 vs 4.2) between groups. |
Unknown | Unknown | N/A | Unknown |
| Kwan et al.a,b [38] |
18.1 ± 6.2 months |
Study:77% Control:79% |
√ |
√ ATR |
√ SRS-22 (initial mean:4.2) |
× |
1. 17% improved, 62% stabilized and 21% worsened in the study group; 4% improved, 46% stabilized and 50% worsened in the control group. 2. No difference in the ATR between groups. 3. The SRS-22 result favored the exercise group (function domain: 4.8 vs 4.6). |
Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown |
| Kim et al.a [6, 35] | 8 weeks | Not reported | √ | × | × | √ Pulmonary function |
1. Significant Cobb reduction between groups (D-value of Cobb angle: 4.26 ± 1.36 vs 2.69 ± 1.11, p < 0.05) 2. Significant peak expiratory flow between groups (D-value of PEF: −1.30 ± 0.87 vs −0.17 ± 0.68, p < 0.05) |
Unknown | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Schreiber et al.a [43, 44, 45] | 6 months |
Supervised:76%. Home program: 73% |
√ | × | × | × | 1. Significantly (D-value of Cobb: −3.5° vs + 2.3°, p < 0.01) smaller largest curve and sum of curves (decreased 0.4°, p < 0.05) between groups. | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown |
| Kim et al.a,b [6, 35] | 3 months | Not reported | √ | × | × | √ Weight distribution |
1. Significant (P < 0.05) inter−/intra-group Cobb reduction: Schroth group: 23.6 ± 1.5° to 12.0 ± 4.7°; Pilate group: 24.0 ± 2.6° to 16.0 ± 6.9° 2. No difference of weight distribution in the control whereas significant (P < 0.05) improvement was noted in the study group. |
Unknown | Unknown | N/A | N/A |
| Kuru et al.a [37] | 24 weeks | Not reported | √ |
√ ATR, height of hump, waist-asymmetry |
√ SRS-23 (initial mean:3.9) |
× |
1. Greater improvements in Cobb angle (−2.53°, P < 0.001), ATR (−4.23°, P < 0.001), height of hump (−68.66 cm, P < 0.01) and waist asymmetry (P < 0.01) were observed in the supervised exercise group compared with the home exercise group and control at 24-week. 2. No difference of QoL between groups (4.4 vs 3.9 vs 4.1). |
Unknown | Unknown | N/A | N/A |
| Monticone et al.a,b | 42.8 months | Not reported | √ |
√ ATR |
√ SRS-22 (initial mean:3.8) |
× |
1. Significant (−5.3° vs + 1.7°, p < 0.001) improvement of Cobb angles between groups at skeletal maturity and at 1-year follow up. 2. Significant difference of ATR between groups (−3.5° vs −0.4°, p < 0.001). 3. The Seas group showed significant (P < 0.001) improvements in all domains of the SRS-22 at skeletal maturity (1-year follow-up: 4.8 vs 4.0). |
Yes (* ≥ 13 years) | Unknown | Unknown | N/A |
a Significant intra−/inter-group Cobb reduction. b Significant Cobb reduction beyond 5°in the SSE group. QoL Quality of Life POTSI Posterior Trunk Symmetry Index, WRVS Walter Reed Visual Assessment Scale, TAPS Trunk Appearance Perception Scale, ATR angle of trunk rotation, ATI angle of trunk inclination. √: reported in the either methodology or results. × Not reported. Yes, the interaction effect with SSE was discussed. Unknown: not discussed, N/A not applicable