What are the current guidelines for monitoring scoliosis progression in adolescents?

Current guidelines for monitoring scoliosis progression in adolescents recommend a structured approach combining clinical assessment and imaging to track curve progression and guide management decisions.

Initial evaluation includes a thorough clinical examination using tools such as the Adams forward bend test and measurement of the angle of trunk rotation with a scoliometer to detect and quantify spinal curvature. Regular monitoring intervals depend on the severity of the curve, skeletal maturity, and risk of progression.

For adolescents with mild scoliosis (typically curves less than 20 degrees), clinical follow-up every 6 months is advised, with radiographic assessment if there is clinical evidence of progression or at key growth milestones. For moderate curves (20–40 degrees), more frequent monitoring every 3–4 months with radiographs is recommended to detect progression early and consider bracing. Curves greater than 40 degrees usually warrant specialist referral and more intensive monitoring or intervention.

Radiographic monitoring should be performed with standing posteroanterior spinal X-rays to measure Cobb angle, the standard metric for scoliosis severity. The frequency of imaging is balanced against radiation exposure risks, so clinical signs and growth status guide timing. Imaging intervals may be extended once skeletal maturity is reached and curve progression stabilizes.

Additional factors influencing monitoring include the adolescent’s pubertal status, as rapid growth phases increase progression risk, and any symptoms such as pain or neurological signs that may necessitate urgent evaluation. Multidisciplinary involvement including orthopaedics, physiotherapy, and primary care ensures comprehensive assessment and timely intervention.

Recent literature supports these guideline principles, emphasizing the importance of individualized monitoring schedules based on risk stratification and the use of validated clinical tools alongside imaging (Kim et al., 2009; Expert Panel on Pediatric Imaging, 2019). Emerging imaging modalities and risk prediction models may refine monitoring in the future but have not yet replaced current standards.