Plagiocephaly clinical research

There are a few reasons why research into helmet therapy in the UK is limited. Firstly, plagiocephaly is not classified as a medical condition by the NHS. Secondly, head shapes are not measured at birth or during infancy, reducing the incentive for academic studies. Due to this gap, we have reviewed international studies available.

Effectiveness of Conservative vs. Helmet Therapy

Study: Conducted at Children’s Memorial Hospital, Chicago (2004-2011), analysing 4,378 babies.
Published: Journal of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (March 2015).

Results:

• Conservative treatment (repositioning and physiotherapy):
  • 77.1% achieved complete correction.
  • 15.8% needed to transition to helmet therapy.
  • 7.1% had incomplete correction.
• Helmet therapy (first-line treatment):
  • 94.4% achieved complete correction.
  • 96.1% of babies who failed conservative therapy later achieved full correction with helmets.

• Babies in the helmet group generally had more severe head asymmetry and were older than those in the repositioning group.

Risk factors for treatment failure:

• Conservative treatment failure risks:
  • poor compliance
  • baby’s advanced age
  • prolonged torticollis
  • severe cranial ratio
  • developmental delay
• Helmet therapy failure risks:
  • poor compliance
  • advanced baby age

This study confirms our clinician’s view that helmet therapy is the correct treatment for babies with moderate to severe plagiocephaly or brachycephaly, but repositioning does work for young babies with mild cranial deformation.

View research paper here

Helmet vs. No Helmet Study

• Largest study to date comparing helmet-treated vs. untreated babies.
• 128 infants enrolled (62 with helmet therapy, 66 without).
• Results:
  • Treated infants: 68% improvement.
  • Untreated infants: 31% improvement.
  • Babies with more severe asymmetry benefited most from helmet therapy.

View research paper here