Comparison of the Effectiveness of Three Lumbosacral Orthoses on Early Spine Surgery Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study
- Author:
Soo Woong JANG
1
;
Hee Seung YANG
;
Young Bae KIM
;
Joo Chul YANG
;
Kyu Bok KANG
;
Tae Wan KIM
;
Kwan Ho PARK
;
Kyung Soo JEON
;
Hee Dong SHIN
;
Ye Eun KIM
;
Han Na CHO
;
Yun Kyung LEE
;
Young LEE
;
Seul Bin Na LEE
;
Dong Young AHN
;
Woo Sob SIM
;
Min JO
;
Gyu Jik JO
;
Dong Bum PARK
;
Gwan Su PARK
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine 2021;45(1):24-32
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the convenience and effectiveness of the existing lumbosacral orthoses (LSO) (classic LSO and Cybertech) and a newly developed LSO (V-LSO) by analyzing postoperative data.
Methods:This prospective cohort study was performed from May 2019 to November 2019 and enrolled and analyzed 88 patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease scheduled for elective lumbar surgery. Three types of LSO that were provided according to the time of patient registration were applied for 6 weeks. Patients were randomized into the classic LSO group (n=31), Cybertech group (n=26), and V-LSO group (n=31). All patients were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and underwent plain lumbar radiography (anteroposterior and lateral views) 10 days postoperatively. Lumbar lordosis (LS angle) and frontal imbalance were measured with and without LSO. At the sixth postoperative week, a follow-up assessment with the ODI and orthosis questionnaire was conducted.
Results:No significant differences were found among the three groups in terms of the LS angle, frontal imbalance, ODI, and orthosis questionnaire results. When the change in the LS angle and frontal imbalance toward the reference value was defined as a positive change with and without LSO, the rate of positive change was significantly different in the V-LSO group (LS angle: 41.94% vs. 61.54% vs. 83.87%; p=0.003).
Conclusion:The newly developed LSO showed no difference regarding its effectiveness and compliance when compared with the existing LSO, but it was more effective in correcting lumbar lordosis.
