A dangerous curve: the role of history in America's scoliosis screening programs
- PMID: 22397340
- PMCID: PMC3489358
- DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300531
A dangerous curve: the role of history in America's scoliosis screening programs
Abstract
In 2004, the US Preventive Services Task Force called for an end to scoliosis screening in US public schools. However, screening endures, although most nations have ended their screening programs. Why? Explanations range from America's unique fee-for-service health care system and its encouragement of high-cost medical specialism to the nation's captivation with new surgeries and technologies. I highlight another, more historical, reason: the persistence of the belief that spinal curvature is a sign of a progressive disease or disability. Despite improved health and the mid-20th-century discovery of antibiotics and vaccines that all but eradicated the diseases historically associated with scoliosis (e.g., polio and tuberculosis), the health fears associated with spinal curvature never fully dissipated. Scoliosis is still seen as a "dangerous curve," although the exact nature of the health risk remains unclear.
Figures
References
-
- US Preventive Services TaskForce, Recommendation Statement: Screening for Idiopathic Scoliosis in Adolescents (AHRQ Pub. No. 05-0568-A. November 2004), accessed February 18, 2011, http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/3rduspstf/scoliosis/scolior.... For more on the establishment of the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), see Steven H. Woolf, Carolyn G. DiGuiseppi, David Atkins, and Douglas B. Kamerow, “Developing Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines: Lessons Learned by the U.S. Preventative Task Force,” Annual Reviews of Public Health 17 (1996): 511–38. The US Public Health Service established the USPSTF in 1984. The USPSTF is a nongovernmental expert panel that reviews evidence regarding the effectiveness of clinical preventive services and makes recommendations for health professionals regarding which preventive services to include in the periodic health examination.
-
- Even when examiners used a scoliometer, a device that results in fewer false-positive results than the forward-bending test, researchers still found significant interreader errors. See Thomas W. Grossman, John M. Mazur, and R. Jay Cummings, “An Evaluation of the Adams Forward Bend Test and the Scoliometer in a Scoliosis School Screening Setting,” Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics 15 (1995): 535–8. See also George A. C. Murrell, Ralph W. Coonrad, Claude T. Moorman, and Robert D. Fitch, “An Assessment of the Reliability of the Scoliometer,” Spine 18 (1993): 709–12.
-
- US Preventative Services Task Force, “Screening for Idiopathic Scoliosis in Adolescents: Recommendation Statement,” accessed February 12, 2011, http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/3rduspstf/scoliosis/scolior....
-
- For Great Britain and Australia, see Theodoros B. Grivas, Marian H. Wade, Stefano Negrini, Joseph P. O'Brien, Toru Maruyama, Martha C. Hawes, Manuel Rigo, Hans Rudolf Weiss, Tomasz Kotwicki, Elias S. Vasiliadis, Lior Neuhaus Sulam, and Tamar Neuhous, “SOSORT Consensus Paper: School Screening for Scoliosis: Where Are We Today?,” Scoliosis 2 (2007): 1–23. For Canada, see Marie Beauséjour, Marjolaine Roy-Beaudry, Lise Goulet, and Hubert Labelle, “Patient Characteristics at the Initial Visit to a Scoliosis Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Community Without School Screening,” Spine 32 (2007): 1349–54. - PubMed
-
- Twenty-one states mandate it through law, and twelve additional states recommend screening. See Grivas, “SOSORT Consensus Paper,” 2.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
