Experimental protocol to investigate cortical, muscular and body representation alterations in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis

Abstract

Background Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the most common form of scoliosis. AIS is a three-dimensional morphological spinal deformity that affects approximately 1-3% of adolescents. Not all factors related to the etiology of AIS have yet been identified. Objective The primary aim of this experimental protocol is to quantitatively investigate alterations in body representation in AIS, and to quantitatively and objectively track the changes in body sensorimotor representation due to treatment. Methods Adolescent girls with a confirmed diagnosis of mild (Cobb angle: 10°-20°) or moderate (21°-35°) scoliosis as well as age and sex-matched controls will be recruited. Participants will be asked to perform a 6-min upright standing and two tasks—named target reaching and forearm bisection task. Eventually, subjects will fill in a self-report questionnaire and a computer-based test to assess body image. This evaluation will be repeated after 6 and 12 months of treatment (i.e., partial or full-time brace and physiotherapy corrective postural exercises). Results We expect that theta brain rhythm in the central brain areas, alpha brain rhythm lateralization and body representation will change over time depending on treatment and scoliosis progression as a compensatory strategy to overcome a sensorimotor dysfunction. We also expect asymmetric activation of the trunk muscle during reaching tasks and decreased postural stability in AIS. Conclusions Quantitatively assess the body representation at different time points during AIS treatment may provide new insights on the pathophysiology and etiology of scoliosis.

Neurophysiological, balance and motion evidence in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A systematic review

“…The findings presented here are in line with previous reviews investigating the pathophysiology and treatment of AIS. However, we chose a rather pragmatic approach: while other works focus on specific subsets of evidence such as anatomical abnormalities or treatments (i.e., [ 83 , 84 ]), our review prioritized the assessment methods. Thus, our results provide a clear, data-driven outlook that leaves less room for subjective inference.…”