Peter W New1,2,3. 1. a Spinal Rehabilitation Service, Caulfield Hospital, Alfred Health , Melbourne , VIC , Australia. 2. b Principal Researcher, Epworth-Monash Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Southern Medical School , Monash University , Melbourne , VIC , Australia. 3. c Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine , Monash University , VIC , Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare secondary conditions in people with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) and non-traumatic spinal cord dysfunction (SCDys). DESIGN: Survey; completed August 2012 - June 2013. SETTING: Community, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with spinal cord damage from any cause. INTERVENTIONS: Nil. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic and clinical variables and the SCI-Secondary Conditions Scale (SCI-SCS). RESULTS: Survey completed by 150 people: 112 (74.7%) with traumatic SCI and 38 (25.3%) with non-traumatic SCDys a median of 10 years post onset. No significant difference (t = -0.6, P = 0.6) in the total SCI-SCS score between those with SCI (mean 13.7) and SCDys (mean 14.4). Except for bladder problems (SCDys mean = 1.5, SD = 1.1; SCI mean = 1.0, SD=1.1; t = -2.6, P = 0.01) there were no significant differences between the aetiology groups regarding the conditions comprising the SCI-SCS (all other P values >0.1). The most common significant or chronic problems from the SCI-SCS were: sexual problems 41%; chronic pain 24%; bladder dysfunction 17%; spasms 17%; joint and muscle pain 15%; bowel dysfunction 14%; circulation problems 14%; contractures 9%; urinary tract infections 9%; pressure ulcer 7% and postural hypotension 5%. A linear regression analysis found that tetraplegia and higher disability were the only variables that significantly influenced (R2 = 0.13; P = 0.005) the total SCI-SCS score and that sex, age, years post injury and etiology of spinal cord damage had no influence. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary conditions following spinal cord damage do not appear to be influenced by etiology. Prevention and management of secondary conditions following need to consider people with non-traumatic SCDys as well as those with traumatic SCI.
OBJECTIVE: To compare secondary conditions in people with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) and non-traumatic spinal cord dysfunction (SCDys). DESIGN: Survey; completed August 2012 - June 2013. SETTING: Community, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with spinal cord damage from any cause. INTERVENTIONS: Nil. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic and clinical variables and the SCI-Secondary Conditions Scale (SCI-SCS). RESULTS: Survey completed by 150 people: 112 (74.7%) with traumatic SCI and 38 (25.3%) with non-traumatic SCDys a median of 10 years post onset. No significant difference (t = -0.6, P = 0.6) in the total SCI-SCS score between those with SCI (mean 13.7) and SCDys (mean 14.4). Except for bladder problems (SCDys mean = 1.5, SD = 1.1; SCI mean = 1.0, SD=1.1; t = -2.6, P = 0.01) there were no significant differences between the aetiology groups regarding the conditions comprising the SCI-SCS (all other P values >0.1). The most common significant or chronic problems from the SCI-SCS were: sexual problems 41%; chronic pain 24%; bladder dysfunction 17%; spasms 17%; joint and muscle pain 15%; bowel dysfunction 14%; circulation problems 14%; contractures 9%; urinary tract infections 9%; pressure ulcer 7% and postural hypotension 5%. A linear regression analysis found that tetraplegia and higher disability were the only variables that significantly influenced (R2 = 0.13; P = 0.005) the total SCI-SCS score and that sex, age, years post injury and etiology of spinal cord damage had no influence. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary conditions following spinal cord damage do not appear to be influenced by etiology. Prevention and management of secondary conditions following need to consider people with non-traumatic SCDys as well as those with traumatic SCI.
Authors: S Charlifue; M W Post; F Biering-Sørensen; A Catz; M Dijkers; S Geyh; J Horsewell; V Noonan; L Noreau; D Tate; K A Sinnott Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Andrei Krassioukov; Todd A Linsenmeyer; Lisa A Beck; Stacy Elliott; Peter Gorman; Steven Kirshblum; Lawrence Vogel; Jill Wecht; Sarah Clay Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2021
Authors: Alessio Conti; Marco Clari; Maeve Nolan; Eva Wallace; Marco Tommasini; Silvia Mozzone; Sara Campagna Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2019
Authors: Mohammad Sohrab Hossain; Md Shofiqul Islam; Md Akhlasur Rahman; Joanne V Glinsky; Robert D Herbert; Stanley Ducharme; Lisa A Harvey Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: So Eyun Park; Stacy Elliott; Vanessa K Noonan; Nancy P Thorogood; Nader Fallah; Allan Aludino; Marcel F Dvorak Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Amanda McIntyre; Stephanie L Marrocco; Samantha A McRae; Lindsay Sleeth; Sander Hitzig; Susan Jaglal; Gary Linassi; Sarah Munce; Dalton L Wolfe Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2020
Authors: Sigmund Hough; Colleen Clemency Cordes; Lance L Goetz; Angela Kuemmel; Jesse A Lieberman; Linda R Mona; Mitchell S Tepper; Jithin G Varghese Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2020
Authors: Peter Wayne New; Inge Eriks-Hoogland; Giorgio Scivoletto; Ronald K Reeves; Andrea Townson; Ruth Marshall; Farooq A Rathore Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2017