Evaluating consensus and uncertainty among treatment options for early-onset scoliosis: new generation and international perspectives.

Abstract

It is currently unknown how treatment preferences differ between a senior group of U.S. spinal surgeons, a new generation of U.S. surgeons, and non-U.S. surgeons with regard to the treatment of early-onset scoliosis (EOS). The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical consensus and uncertainty among treatment options for patients with EOS to understand how they compare between these three cohorts. 11 senior pediatric spinal deformity surgeons in the U.S., 12 "junior" surgeons in the U.S., and 7 surgeons practicing in non-U.S. countries were invited to complete a survey of 315 idiopathic and neuromuscular EOS case scenarios. Treatment options included: conservative management, distraction-based methods, growth guidance/modulation, and arthrodesis. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement, and uncertainty was < 70%. Chi-squared and multiple regression analyses were performed to evaluate the associations between case characteristics and consensus for different treatments. Although all 3 cohorts of surgeons chose conservative management most frequently, the non-U.S. cohort of surgeons chose distraction-based methods more often, particularly for neuromuscular cases. In both U.S. surgeon cohorts, there was consensus for conservative management in idiopathic patients aged 3 or younger regardless of other factors, whereas non-U.S. surgeons selected distraction-based methods for some of these patients. Just as research studies are being conducted to find approaches to optimally manage the EOS population, future research efforts should focus on identifying the reasoning behind treatment preferences in different cohort of surgeons, as this will allow the interexchange of information which can ultimately improve EOS care. V.