Much of the research that has previously been used to support SpineCor has been called into question.
On May of 2016, H Labelle (who was a co-founder of SpineCor) and Guttman et. al https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26809149 found that the results of the patients treated with SpineCor at the St Justine children’s hospital (the home of SpineCor and where the original research was conducted) were not consistent with research previously published.
They found that in fact; “The SC brace did not prevent curve progression as effectively as the Bb. Although it has the potential benefit of increasing mobility during brace wear, the SC brace was associated with increased curve progression in comparison with the Bb. There is also a trend for increased risk of requiring surgery when the SC brace is worn.”
Previous independent authors have found similar results: Gammon et. al https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20733415 found that TLSO had a better out come than SpineCor although the differences were not statistically significant.
Ersen et al http://www.actaorthopaedica.be/acta/download/2016-4/06-ersen-.pdf found again no superior result for SpineCor compared to a TLSO. However looking at their study, their TSLO was a horrible design that holds the patient in their deformity.