Appendix A, A Passive Brace To Improve Activities Of Daily Living Utilizing Compliant Parallel Mechanisms, and Appendix B, Preliminary Summary Compliant Scoliosis Brace, are hereby incorporated by reference in this application.
Scoliosis is a musculo-skeletal disease that causes a three-dimensional deformity primarily characterized by the curvature of the spine in the frontal plane. In this paper we will focus on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), which is the most common form of scoliosis and affects 2 to 3% of adolescents, approximately 10% of which will require medical treatment. Girls are nearly 3 times more likely to have scoliosis than boys. Scoliosis usually affects adolescents during their growth periods between the age of five and eight, and ten until the end of growth.
Scoliosis can lead to certain health implications. Most notably, patients with scoliosis that requires bracing or surgery can experience shortness of breath. In addition, scoliosis patients can suffer from heart problems and back pain. Nonphysical health implications include struggling with self-image, an emotional pain.
A scoliotic spine contains either an “S” or “C” curve. The degree of scoliosis is generally characterized by the Cobb angle, defined as the angle between the two most tilted vertebrae of a spine segment. Cobb angles less than 25° require biannual checkups but no treatment unless the angle increases. A Cobb angle greater than 40° requires surgery. Cobb angles between 25° and 40° generally require bracing to prevent further progression.
Bracing is the most common treatment for AIS. The goal of bracing is not necessarily to correct the curve, but to prevent further progression, though correction can occur. Braces are generally to be worn up to 23 hours a day. It has been recognized that a brace should be designed with regard to the “three C's” (Comfort, Control, and Cosmetics). Comfort refers to the patient's ability to perform ADL, control refers to the brace's ability to apply correction forces of the right directions and magnitudes, and cosmetics refers to the appearance of the brace itself, along with how the patient perceives themselves in the brace. While conventional braces have been able to achieve one or even two of the three Cs, none have been able to achieve all three in the same brace.
The most common braces are rigid, although concepts of flexible braces have recently been explored, and a few have been brought to market. Rigid braces include the Milwaukee, Boston, and Cheneau braces. Flexible braces include the SpineCor and the TriaC braces. The rigid braces tend to be more effective and achieve the control goal of the three Cs, while the flexible braces tend to achieve comfort and cosmetic goals at the expense of control.
For example, the Milwaukee brace was the first documented brace to prove effective with a 74% success rate. It consists of a steel and leather pelvic base with rods that extend to the throat. However, the ‘superstructure’ of this brace caused lower jaw and dental deformities. The Boston brace, currently most recommended for treatment, consists of a standardized size polystyrene shell, tightened around the torso using straps, with interior foam padding to apply corrective forces and ‘cut-outs’ to provide relief. The Boston brace has up to a 93% success rate. The Cheneau brace, which has many variations, is also a rigid plastic shell, but is customized to each individual patient
The most common cause of failure in rigid brace treatment is a lack of patient compliance in wearing the brace. Comfort and aesthetics are the main reasons that patient do not wear braces for the prescribed amount of time each day. Rigid braces limit range of motion, including flexion and rotation, which in turn limits the patient's ADL. Braces are also bulky and cannot be easily hidden. Oversized clothes must be worn to hide a brace. This can damage self-confidence and have a psychological impact on the young patients who are usually going through puberty at the time of treatment.
Flexible braces are designed to address the drawbacks of rigid braces. The SpineCore brace is a flexible brace consisting of elastic bands, a pelvic base, and crotch and thigh bands. This brace allows the patient a much greater range of motion compared to rigid braces, but has a lower success rate according to some sources. Guo, et al found in a study that 5 out of 7 patients who encountered progression of the spinal deformation with the SpineCor brace had no further progression after switching to a rigid brace. The TriaC brace is another flexible brace that consists of two parts—lumbar and thoracic straps that are interconnected by a flexible coupling device. Although the manufacturers of the TriaC brace purport a success rate of 76% success rate, such flexible braces are nevertheless less effective than rigid braces in preventing scoliotic progression.
What is needed is a brace that achieves the three Cs—Comfort, Control, and Cosmetics. The present invention fulfills this need among others.
The following presents a simplified summary of the invention in order to provide a basic understanding of some aspects of the invention. This summary is not an extensive overview of the invention. It is not intended to identify key/critical elements of the invention or to delineate the scope of the invention. Its sole purpose is to present some concepts of the invention in a simplified form as a prelude to the more detailed description that is presented later.
The present invention relates to a flexible scoliosis brace designed to provide corrective force in a specific directions and mobility in other directions. The invention also relates to the identification of the problem with the SpineCor and TriaC braces. Specifically, without being tied to a particular theory, Applicants believe these braces lack the ability to be tuned for both compliance and stiffness that compliant mechanisms, described below, can supply. Both the SpineCor and TriaC braces are designed to provide corrective force with varying levels of reported success. This is in contrast to rigid braces which are designed to constrain the spine. This relationship is characterized as force-controlled correction (flexible braces) vs. displacement-controlled correction (rigid braces). The invention uses compliant mechanisms to constrain the spine through tuned stiffness, while permitting specific motions through kinematic design. Compliant mechanisms are used because they can apply the corrective force, but also allow the patients some range of motion. Thus, we seek to improve patients' comfort by designing a brace that improves range of motion, while remaining stiff in the corrective direction.
The brace comprises compliant mechanisms, which may or may not be attached to rigid elements. The brace may also include flexible shell elements, flexures, and/or lamina emergent sheets. In one embodiment, the back brace comprises: (a) a pelvic member configured to snuggly wrap around a user such that the pelvic member is essentially immobilized relative to the pelvis of the user; (b) at least one thoracic member configured to snuggly wrap around the user such that the at least one thoracic member is essentially immobilized relative to the ribs of the user; and (c) one or more first compliant connectors between the pelvic member and the at least one thoracic member and configured to impart an urging force between the pelvic member and the at least one thoracic member.
In another embodiment, the back brace comprises: (a) a pelvic member configured to snuggly wrap around a user such that the pelvic member is essentially immobilized relative to the pelvis of the user; (b) at least one thoracic member configured to snuggly around the user such that the at least one thoracic member is essentially immobilized relative to the ribs of the user; and (c) least one compliant connector between the pelvic member and the at least one thoracic member, and being configured to allow the pelvic member and the at least one thoracic member to move relative to each other with at least 2 degrees of freedom, but less than 6 degrees of freedom.
Referring to
Each of these elements is described below in more detail and in connection with selected alternate embodiments.
The pelvis and thoracic members 101, 102 function to secure the brace to the user's pelvis (hip) and thorax (chest), respectively, and to transmit the force applied between them by the compliant\ connector(s) to the user's body at the pelvis and thorax. To this end, the members generally, although not necessarily, comprise a rigid or semi-rigid material to resist deformation from the force of the compliant connector. The type of material used and its thickness will depend on the expected forces and the physical configuration of the pelvic and thoracic members, which can vary as described below. One skilled in the art will readily understand how optimize the materials and their thickness to ensure the pelvic and thoracic members have the requisite stiffness to absorb the stresses imposed by the compliant connectors and translate those forces to the user's body. Suitable material include, for example, carbon fiber composite, fiberglass composite, and plastics such as Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), acetal, polycarbonate (PC), and polypropylene (PP).
The pelvic and thoracic members may also comprise belts or additional apparatus to make the brace's attachment to the body more secure. Such apparatus is well known to those of skill in the art, and, thus, is not described herein in detail.
The compliant connectors 103 serve to connect the pelvis and thoracic members and provide a resilient force among the components. The force generation approaches of the compliance connectors are described in detail in Appendix B, Chapter 4. Generally, the compliance connectors are configured to provide one or more of force mechanisms selected from shell mechanisms, such as cross helix, helical strip, single curve, hyperbolic paraboloid, double paraboloid, single corrugated and double corrugated, or flexure mechanisms, such as cartwheel hinge, parallel beam, cross pivot hinge, cross beam, LET outside, LET inside, or S-beam. In one embodiment, the compliance connectors are configured to generate at least 30N, 40N or 50N of force between the pelvic and thoracic members.
The compliance connectors may be configured to achieve the desired stiffness between the pelvic and thoracic members while still allowing for primary motions. Generally, the primary motions involve sagittal bending, twisting, and lateral bending. Modeling the brace to balance desired stiffness while maintaining primary motions is described, for example, in Appendix B, generally, and Chapters 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 in particular. In one embodiment, the compliance connectors are configured to allow for at least 13° in the sagittal direction, 10° in twist, and 9° in lateral bending. In one embodiment, the compliant connectors are configured to allow the pelvic member and the at least one thoracic member to move relative to each other with at least 2 degrees of freedom, but less than 6 degrees of freedom. In another embodiment, the compliant connectors are configured to allow the pelvic member and the thoracic member to move relative to each other with at least 2 degrees of freedom, but less than 5 degrees of freedom. In still another embodiment, the compliant connectors are configured to allow the pelvic member and the thoracic member to move relative to each other with at least 2 degrees of freedom, but less than 4 degrees of freedom.
As with the pelvic and thoracic members, the materials used for the compliance connectors will depend on the desired forces and brace configuration. For example, in some embodiments, the compliance connectors comprise the same material as the pelvic and thoracic members. In such embodiments, the compliance connectors may be integral with the pelvic and thoracic members. In other embodiments, the compliance connectors are discrete and comprise elastic materials such as ABS, PP, PC, or acetal and stiffer materials such as titanium, stainless steel, and aluminum.
The brace may be configured in different ways, with alternative pelvic members, thoracic members and compliance connector configurations being used to achieve different design objectives as described in detail Appendix B, Chapter 7. For example, referring to
In one embodiment, the pelvic members may wrap around entirely around the body or just a portion of the body. For example, referring to
Like the pelvic member, the thoracic member may be configured in different ways. In one embodiment the thoracic member wraps around the user's body. For example, braces 201 and 205 have circular thoracic members 207, 229, which wrap around the user's upper chest. Brace 205 also has an additional pad 229a extending from the thoracic member 229 for additional contact surface to spread the load from the compliant connectors as discussed below. Such embodiments may be preferred to provide specified force to particular areas of the spine. Likewise, braces 203 and 204 have crossed helix thoracic members 213, 216. Such embodiments may be preferred to provide larger ranges of motion in sagittal bending. Alternatively, the thoracic member may be open as with brace 202. Thoracic member 220 of brace 202 just partially wraps around the user's upper chest. Such embodiment may be preferred for Scoliotic curves with an apex opposite member 223. Such an embodiment may also require additional apparatus, such as a belt or strap, to secure the thoracic member to the user.
A variety of different compliant connector configurations are possible to connect and bias the thoracic member and pelvic member. The braces in
Single/double corrugated members may also be used to connect to the pelvic member. For example, braces 203, 205 use two single/double corrugated members 214, 230 to connect to the pelvic member 212, 218. Using symmetrical single/double corrugated members may be preferred for permit twisting and in-plane bending while providing lateral bending force. Likewise, brace 202 uses one single/double corrugated member 211 to connect to the pelvic member 209. Using single/double corrugated members to connect to the pelvic member may be preferred to permit sagittal bending while providing limited force in the lateral bending direction.
In yet other embodiments, braces 203, 204 use a curved member 224, 217 as intermediate compliant connectors. Using curved members as intermediate compliant connectors may be preferred for permitting sagittal bending while applying lateral bending and twisting force.
The various thoracic members, pelvic members, and compliant connectors described in connection with
In one particular embodiment of the brace 300, helix 303a was constructed with 12 layers of carbon fiber a layer thickness of 0.305 mm. The carbon was laid directly on top of the mold and the entire mold was vacuum bagged. This 12 layer helix had thickness varying from 3.8 to 4.1 mm. The force generators 303c and 303d were all produced using vacuum forming using PLA. The thickness varied between 1.8 mm to 3.0 mm for 303c and 303d.
Referring to
The various thoracic members, pelvic members, and flexure compliant connectors described in connection with
Referring to
It should be understood that the foregoing is illustrative and not limiting and that obvious modifications may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit of the invention. Accordingly, the specification is intended to cover such alternatives, modifications, and equivalence as may be included within the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the following claims.
This application is based on U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/375,254, filed Aug. 15, 2016, and incorporated by referenced herein along with its appendices.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62375254 | Aug 2016 | US |