AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Article Link
Collect
Submit Manuscript
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Original Research | Open Access

Influential factors for final neurorehabilitation outcome scores in patients with spinal cord injury: A longitudinal cohort study

Mir Saeed Yekaninejada,bNazi DerakhshanradaElahe KazemibAsal DerakhshanradaHooshang Saberia( )
Department of Neurosurgery, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 1419733141 Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 1417613151 Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Show Author Information

Abstract

Study design

Longitudinal prospective cohort study.

Objectives

To assess the coefficient of efficacy and the influence of various demographic and neurological factors on changes in Spinal Cord Independence Measure Ⅲ (SCIM-Ⅲ) scores over time in traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) patients.

Setting

Patient recruitment and evaluations were conducted at the Brain and Spinal Injury Research Center in Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran, Iran.

Methods

The study was performed over an 8-year period in our outpatient rehabilitation setting. Changes in SCIM-Ⅲ scores were assessed in 559 TSCI patients (of 1460 enrolled patients) who fit the inclusion criteria. All included patients participated in our outpatient rehabilitation program, which consisted of a multidisciplinary education program combined with occupational therapy, physical therapy, and home nursing as a rehabilitation package for a 6-month period. Patients then received follow-up assessments every 6 months.

Results

Predictors of the SCIM-Ⅲ score as a rehabilitation outcome tool, and of its change over time, included age (younger patients had better outcomes, p = 0.067), marital status (married patients had better outcomes, p = 0.031), education level (patients with university education had better outcomes, p = 0.003), occupation status (employed patients had better outcomes, p = 0.009), and neurological level of injury (patients with injuries at lower levels had better outcomes, p < 0.001). However, sex and injury severity as per the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) had no significant effects on functional outcomes (i.e., SCIM-Ⅲ score changes over time).

Conclusion

Age, marital status, education level, employment, and neurological level all affected the final SCIM-Ⅲ scores of SCI patients. By contrast, sex and AIS grade were not significant predictors of SCIM-Ⅲ outcomes. Further studies that include additional factors may be useful for future SCIM-Ⅲ models.

References

1

Itzkovich M, Shefler H, Front L, et al. SCIM Ⅲ (Spinal Cord Independence Measure version Ⅲ): reliability of assessment by interview and comparison with assessment by observation. Spinal Cord. 2018;56(1):46-51. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2017.97.

2

Itzkovich M, Gelernter I, Biering-Sorensen F, et al. The Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) version Ⅲ: reliability and validity in a multi-center international study. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(24):1926-1933. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280601046302.

3

Saberi H, Vosoughi F, Derakhshanrad N, et al. Development of Persian version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure Ⅲ assessed by interview: a psychometric study. Spinal Cord. 2018;56(10):980-986. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-018-0160-5.

4

Catz A, Itzkovich M, Elkayam K, et al. Reliability validity and responsiveness of the spinal cord independence measure 4th version in a multicultural setup. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2022;103(3):430-440.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2021.07.811.

5

Derakhshanrad N, Vosoughi F, Yekaninejad MS, et al. Functional impact of multidisciplinary outpatient program on patients with chronic complete spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2015;53(12):860-865. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2015.136.

6

Hsieh CH, DeJong G, Groah S, et al. Comparing rehabilitation services and outcomes between older and younger people with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(4 suppl l):S175-S186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2012.10.038.

7

Scivoletto G, Glass C, Anderson KD, et al. An international age- and gender-controlled model for the Spinal Cord Injury Ability Realization Measurement Index (SCI-ARMI). Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair. 2015;29(1):25-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968314524631.

8

Reinhardt JD, Fellinghauer CS, Post MWM. Change in environmental barriers experienced over a 5-year period by people living with spinal cord injury in Switzerland: a prospective cohort study. Spinal Cord. 2021;59(4):441-451. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-020-00580-7.

9

Aidinoff E, Front L, Itzkovich M, et al. Expected spinal cord independence measure, third version, scores for various neurological levels after complete spinal cord lesions. Spinal Cord. 2011;49(8):893-896. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2011.32.

10

Ackerman P, Morrison SA, McDowell S, et al. Using the Spinal Cord Independence Measure Ⅲ to measure functional recovery in a post-acute spinal cord injury program. Spinal Cord. 2010;48(5):380-387. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2009.140.

11

Marino RJ, Graves DE. Metric properties of the ASIA motor score: subscales improve correlation with functional activities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(11):1804-1810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2004.04.026.

12

van Middendorp JJ, Hosman AJF, Donders AR, et al. A clinical prediction rule for ambulation outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet. 2011;377(9770):1004-1010. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62276-3.

13

Derakhshanrad N, Yekaninejad MS, Vosoughi F, et al. Epidemiological study of traumatic spinal cord injuries: experience from a specialized spine center in Iran. Spinal Cord. 2016;54(10):901-907. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2016.10.

14

Catz A, Greenberg E, Itzkovich M, et al. A new instrument for outcome assessment in rehabilitation medicine: spinal cord injury ability realization measurement index. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(3):399-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/s3-9993(03)00475-1.

15

Divanoglou A, Tasiemski T, Jörgensen S. INTERnational Project for the Evaluation of “activE Rehabilitation” (inter-PEER) - a protocol for a prospective cohort study of community peer-based training programmes for people with spinal cord injury. BMC Neurol. 2020;20(1):14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-019-1546-5.

Journal of Neurorestoratology
Article number: 100117
Cite this article:
Yekaninejad MS, Derakhshanrad N, Kazemi E, et al. Influential factors for final neurorehabilitation outcome scores in patients with spinal cord injury: A longitudinal cohort study. Journal of Neurorestoratology, 2024, 12(2): 100117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnrt.2024.100117

163

Views

1

Crossref

0

Web of Science

0

Scopus

Altmetrics

Received: 21 December 2023
Revised: 05 February 2024
Accepted: 08 February 2024
Published: 10 April 2024
© 2024 The Authors.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Return