OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes, complications, and therapy intensity of inpatient rehabilitation in patients with paraplegia caused by spinal cord injury associated with aortic aneurysm repair (SCI-AA) versus patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Case-controlled study. SETTING: SCI unit in a rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen patients with SCI-AA and 17 patients with traumatic SCI. INTERVENTION: Standard rehabilitation therapy for SCI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of stay (LOS) in acute and rehabilitation hospitals; FIM instrument scores; FIM change; FIM efficiency; complications; therapy intensity; and ambulatory state and return to community at discharge. RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in acute and rehabilitation LOS and admission FIM scores. Discharge FIM scores, FIM change, and FIM efficiencies were significantly lower in the SCI-AA group, which had many complications related to AA and SCI. Intensity of rehabilitation sports therapy in the SCI-AA group was significantly lower than that of the traumatic SCI group, but total therapy intensity did not differ significantly. Both had similar rates of return to ambulatory state and discharge to the community. CONCLUSIONS: SCI-AA patients had many complications that interfered with rehabilitation therapy, and could not achieve functional gains comparable to those with traumatic SCI. However, both groups achieved comparable success with return to ambulatory state and discharge to the community.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes, complications, and therapy intensity of inpatient rehabilitation in patients with paraplegia caused by spinal cord injury associated with aortic aneurysm repair (SCI-AA) versus patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Case-controlled study. SETTING: SCI unit in a rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen patients with SCI-AA and 17 patients with traumatic SCI. INTERVENTION: Standard rehabilitation therapy for SCI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of stay (LOS) in acute and rehabilitation hospitals; FIM instrument scores; FIM change; FIM efficiency; complications; therapy intensity; and ambulatory state and return to community at discharge. RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in acute and rehabilitation LOS and admission FIM scores. Discharge FIM scores, FIM change, and FIM efficiencies were significantly lower in the SCI-AA group, which had many complications related to AA and SCI. Intensity of rehabilitation sports therapy in the SCI-AA group was significantly lower than that of the traumatic SCI group, but total therapy intensity did not differ significantly. Both had similar rates of return to ambulatory state and discharge to the community. CONCLUSIONS: SCI-AA patients had many complications that interfered with rehabilitation therapy, and could not achieve functional gains comparable to those with traumatic SCI. However, both groups achieved comparable success with return to ambulatory state and discharge to the community.