header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

THORACOLUMBAR SACRAL ORTHOSIS (TLSO) BRACE FOR SPINE FRACTURES: WHAT'S THE EVIDENCE AND DO PATIENTS USE THEM?

The Welsh Orthopaedic Society (WOS) Meeting, Newport, Wales, 26–27 May 2022.



Abstract

Introduction

Mode of non-operative management of thoracolumbar spine fracture continues to remain controversial with the most common modality hinging on bracing. TLSO is the device with a relative extension locked position, and many authors suggest they may have a role in the healing process, diminishing the load transferred via the anterior column, limiting segmental motion, and helping in pain control. However, several studies have shown prolonged use of brace may lead to skin breakdown, diminished pulmonary capacity, weakness of paraspinal musculature with no difference in pain and functional outcomes between patients treated with or without brace.

Aims

To identify number of spinal braces used for spinal injury and cost implications (in a DGH), to identify the impact on length of stay, to ascertain patient compliance and quality of patient information provided for brace usage, reflect whether we need to change our practice on TLSO brace use.

Methods

Data collected over 18-month period (from Jan.2020 to July 2021). Patients were identified from the TLSO brace issue list of the orthotic department, imaging (X-rays, CT, MRI scans) reviewed to confirm fracture and records reviewed to confirm neurology and non-operative management. Patient feedback was obtained via post or telephone consultation. Inclusion criteria- patients with single or multi -level thoracolumbar osteoporotic or traumatic fractures with no neurological involvement treated in a TLSO brace. Exclusion criteria- neurological involvement, cervical spine injuries, decision to treat surgically, concomitant bony injuries.

Results

72 braces were issued in the time frame with 42 patients remaining in the study based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patient feedback reflected that 62% patients did not receive adequate advice for brace usage, 73% came off the brace earlier than advised, and 60% would prefer to be treated without a brace if given a choice. The average increase in length of stay was 3 days awaiting brace fitting and delivery. The average total cost burden on the NHS was £127,500 (lower estimate) due to brace usage.

Conclusion

If there is equivalence between treatment with/without a brace, there is a need to rethink the practice of prescribing brace for all non-operatively treated fractures and a case-by-case approach may prove more beneficial.


Email: