MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 8966 voluntary school students aged 13-15 years old were recruited for scoliosis screening. Screening was done by measuring the angle of trunk rotation (ATR) on forward bending test (FBT) using a scoliometer. ATR of 5 degrees or more was considered positive. Positively screened students had standard radiographs done for measurement of the Cobb angle. Cobb angle of >10° was used to diagnose scoliosis. The percentage of radiological assessment referral, prevalence rate and PPV of scoliosis were then calculated.
RESULTS: Percentage of radiological assessment referral (ATR >5°) was 4.2% (182/4381) for male and 5.0% (228/4585) for female. Only 38.0% of those with ATR >5° presented for further radiological assessment. The adjusted prevalence rate was 2.55% for Cobb angle >10°, 0.59% for >20° and 0.12% for >40°. The PPV is 55.8% for Cobb angle >10°, 12.8% for >20° and 2.6% for > 40°.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study of school scoliosis screening in Malaysia. The prevalence rate of scoliosis was 2.55%. The positive predictive value was 55.8%, which is adequate to suggest that the school scoliosis screening programme did play a role in early detection of scoliosis. However, a cost effectiveness analysis will be needed to firmly determine its efficacy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted in a tertiary referral cen re using the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) questionnaire during the patients' annual follow up, betwee February to April 2014. Thirtyseven patients who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled.
RESULTS: The mean pre-operative Cobb's angles were 57.8o ± 12.7o and mean post-operative angle of 20.0o ± 10.4o, resulting in average correction of 65.9 ± 14.4%. Mean preoperative rib hump was 61.1 ± 15.4 mm with mean postoperative rib hump of 15.8 ± 17.8 mm, resulting in average reduction of 77.7 ± 23.7%. Mean of post-operative total SRS score was 4.1 ± 0.5. Using Spearman rank correlation, the percentage of Cobb's angle correction versus the SRS-22 score showed correlation of 0.17 (P=0.33) while the percentage of rib hump reduction versus SRS-22 score showed a correlation of 0.11 (P=0.53).
CONCLUSION: In this study, the average total SRS-22 score was 4.1 ± 0.5 (range, 3.1-4.9) post-operatively indicating very high satisfaction rate overall. Despite attempts at greater curve correction and rib hump reduction, there is no direct correlation between patient satisfaction and radiographic parameters.
METHODS: Eleven participants were involved in this qualitative research which utilised the interpretative phenomenological analysis approach more renowned in health psychology research. All interviews conducted at their home. The interviews were recorded, typed verbatim, and the transcripts were analysed using NVivo software version 8.0.
RESULTS: The main barriers identified at the primary care level were 1) nondisclosure of their visual problems originated from their belated needs for better sight, delayed awareness of their visual status and social stigma and 2) patient-provider-related issues namely miscommunication and delayed referral. The first main theme explains their belief for not requiring surgery. This has led to their delayed awareness and impeded disclosure of their visual problems to family members or primary care providers. The second main theme reflects the provider-patient-related issues which retarded cataract detection and referral process required for earlier cataract extraction surgery.
CONCLUSION: Thus, the appropriate approach targeting these specific barriers at primary care level will be able to detect, motivate and assist patients for early uptake of cataract extraction surgery to improve their vision and prevent severe blindness.