Objective: The aim of this study was to show the effect of a universal (all neonates) ultrasound screening in newborns on the incidence of operative treatment of hip dysplasia.

Materials: A retrospective study was performed and all newborns of the county Tyrol (Austria) between 1978 and 1998 (8257 births / year ((range: 7766 – 8858)) were reviewed regarding hip dysplasia and following hip surgeries. Between 1978 and 1983 clinical examination alone was performed to detect hip dysplasia. Between 1983 and 1988 an ultrasound screening programme according to Graf was initiated in our county. Between 1988 and 1998 ultrasound screening was performed in all newborns. Hence two observation periods were determined: 1978–1983 and 1993–1998. The time period between 1983 and 1993 was excluded to minimize bias and learning curve regarding the initiation of the ultrasound screening programme. A retrospective comparative analysis of the two observation periods regarding surgical treatment and costs caused by hip dysplasia was performed. During the observation period indication for surgery did not change, however new treatment techniques were introduced. Patients with neuromuscular and Perthes diseases were excluded. According to age dependent surgical procedures three patient samples were determined: Group A: 0–1.5 years, Group B: 1.5–15 years and Group C: 15–35 years.

Results: Comparison of the two observation periods showed no influence on the number of interventions for dysplastic hips in group C (pelvic osteotomies and VDROs). In group A, a decrease of hip reductions was seen from 25.6±3.2 to 7.0± 1.4 cases per year. In group B, there was a decrease of operative procedures for dysplastic hips from 18.0±3.2 to 3.4±1.3 interventions per year. Since the introduction of universal hip ultrasound screening the decrease of the total number of interventions for all groups was 78.6%. Comparison of costs of the two observation periods showed an increase of all costs caused by DDH and CDH of 57.000 euro/ year for the time period between 1993 and 1998 which was mainly caused by the ultrasound screening programme. There was a significant reduction of costs regarding operative and non operative treatment for dysplastic hips from 410.000 euro (1978–1983) to 117.00 euro (1993–1998).

Conclusion: Initially there were higher costs caused by the screening method, but on the other hand total number and costs for operative and nonoperative treatment of dysplastic hips were significantly reduced by the universal ultrasound screening programme. In our mind patient’s and family distress and pain related to interventions performed for CDH and DDH justify the slight increase of costs caused by the universal screening programme. We therefore recommend universal hip ultrasound screening for neonates.

Objective: The aim of the study is to get information about compliance as input of the patient and brace-correction as input of the technician for a successful treatment of Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) with TLSO.

Study design: 234 patients with an idiopathic scoliosis (Cobb angle 20°–50°) were evaluated. Measurements were taken on standing radiographs (ap) before therapy, six months later and at least one year after weaning of the brace. Compliance was judged with compliance score into two groups with good and bad compliance. Also two groups with good (> 40% correction) and bad initial correction were formed.

Results: In patient with good compliance (n-188) and also good initial correction (n-136), a continuous correction of about 7°±4° Cobb angle was evident. Patient with good compliance but bad initial correction (n-45) can only expect a stop of progression. Patient with bad compliance (n-47) but good initial correction have shown progression of curvature with high variation (32°±6° to 37°±9°). Initial correction is low in cases with Cobb angle > 40° or > Risser II (n-21).

Conclusion: The result depends on the Cobb angle at the begin of therapy, brace correction and compliance. Initial correction gets worse in severe cases and cannot be compensated by compliance (Fulltime bracing).

The criteria of bracing have to be questioned: “In some cases we are to late”. In our recommendation we have to start earlier and a parttime-bracing has to be discussed in cases with Cobb angle < 30°