Clinical outcomes after bracing for vertebral compression fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND: Vertebral compression fractures are common and result in significant pain and loss of function. Treatment strategy, however, remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials to elucidate the impact of bracing on these injuries. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review utilizing Embase, OVID MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify randomized trials evaluating brace therapy for adult patients with thoracic and lumbar compression fractures. Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of studies and risk of bias. The primary assessed outcome was pain after injury. Secondary outcomes were function, quality of life, opioid use, and kyphotic progression [anterior vertebral body compression percentage (AVBCP)]. Continuous variables were analyzed using mean differences and standardized mean differences, and dichotomous variables were analyzed using odds ratios in random-effects models. GRADE criteria were applied. RESULTS: Of 1,502 articles, a total of 3 studies with 447 patients (96% female) were included. Fifty-four patients were managed without a brace, and 393 with a brace (195 rigid, 198 soft). At 3 to 6 months post-injury, rigid bracing resulted in significantly less pain compared to no brace (SMD =−1.32, 95% CI: −1.89 to −0.76, P<0.05, I(2)=41%), though this diminished at long-term follow-up of 48 weeks. Radiographic kyphosis, opioid use, function, or quality of life were not significantly different at any timepoint. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate quality evidence demonstrates rigid bracing of vertebral compression fractures may decrease pain up to 6 months post-injury, though there is no difference in radiographic parameters, opioid use, function, or quality of life at short- or long-term follow-up. No difference was found between rigid and soft bracing; therefore, soft bracing may be an adequate alternative.