A M Round1,2, S E Park3,4, K Walden3, V K Noonan3,4, A F Townson5,6, A V Krassioukov1,5,6. 1. International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries (ICORD), Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 2. Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 3. Rick Hansen Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 4. Department of Orthopedics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 5. Department of Medicine, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 6. GF Strong Rehabilitation Centre, Vancouver Health Authority, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Interactive workshops with a presurvey-postsurvey. OBJECTIVES: To describe a series of workshops held at international meetings to inform the spinal cord injury (SCI) community about the International Standards to Document Remaining Autonomic Function after Spinal Cord Injury (ISAFSCI) and to obtain feedback on both the workshop and the ISAFSCI assessment. SETTING: Three international conferences of SCI practitioners in Toronto, Las Vegas and Vancouver held between 2012 and 2013. METHODS: The workshops included an overview of the ISAFSCI, sharing experiences using it in clinical practice and interactive cases illustrating how to complete the scoring. A presurvey-postsurvey was administered to obtain feedback on the workshops and the ISAFSCI assessment. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen participants completed the workshop surveys and 96% (109/114) completed both presurvey and postsurvey. Prior to the workshop, 41% (47/114) of those who had completed the survey reported assessing autonomic function in their practice, and of those, 53% (25/47) reported using the ISAFSCI. After the workshop, 74% (84/114) of participants reported that the case studies were helpful, and 57% (65/114) reported that they wanted to start or continue to use the ISAFSCI in their clinical practice. Suggestions for improving the ISAFSCI included providing further areas to consider when performing the assessment, addressing ambiguity of terms and reporting foreseeable implementation challenges. CONCLUSION: Results from this workshop suggest that more work is needed to inform the SCI community on the ISAFSCI assessment and to further clarify its language. Results from this study will inform future revisions to the ISAFSCI.
STUDY DESIGN: Interactive workshops with a presurvey-postsurvey. OBJECTIVES: To describe a series of workshops held at international meetings to inform the spinal cord injury (SCI) community about the International Standards to Document Remaining Autonomic Function after Spinal Cord Injury (ISAFSCI) and to obtain feedback on both the workshop and the ISAFSCI assessment. SETTING: Three international conferences of SCI practitioners in Toronto, Las Vegas and Vancouver held between 2012 and 2013. METHODS: The workshops included an overview of the ISAFSCI, sharing experiences using it in clinical practice and interactive cases illustrating how to complete the scoring. A presurvey-postsurvey was administered to obtain feedback on the workshops and the ISAFSCI assessment. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen participants completed the workshop surveys and 96% (109/114) completed both presurvey and postsurvey. Prior to the workshop, 41% (47/114) of those who had completed the survey reported assessing autonomic function in their practice, and of those, 53% (25/47) reported using the ISAFSCI. After the workshop, 74% (84/114) of participants reported that the case studies were helpful, and 57% (65/114) reported that they wanted to start or continue to use the ISAFSCI in their clinical practice. Suggestions for improving the ISAFSCI included providing further areas to consider when performing the assessment, addressing ambiguity of terms and reporting foreseeable implementation challenges. CONCLUSION: Results from this workshop suggest that more work is needed to inform the SCI community on the ISAFSCI assessment and to further clarify its language. Results from this study will inform future revisions to the ISAFSCI.
Authors: Stephen Burns; Fin Biering-Sørensen; William Donovan; Daniel E Graves; Amitabh Jha; Mark Johansen; Linda Jones; Andrei Krassioukov; Steven Kirshblum; M J Mulcahey; Mary Schmidt Read; William Waring Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2012
Authors: Steven C Kirshblum; William Waring; Fin Biering-Sorensen; Stephen P Burns; Mark Johansen; Mary Schmidt-Read; William Donovan; Daniel Graves; Amit Jha; Linda Jones; M J Mulcahey; Andrei Krassioukov Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: M S Alexander; F Biering-Sorensen; D Bodner; N L Brackett; D Cardenas; S Charlifue; G Creasey; V Dietz; J Ditunno; W Donovan; S L Elliott; I Estores; D E Graves; B Green; A Gousse; A B Jackson; M Kennelly; A-K Karlsson; A Krassioukov; K Krogh; T Linsenmeyer; R Marino; C J Mathias; I Perkash; A W Sheel; G Schilero; G Shilero; B Schurch; J Sonksen; S Stiens; J Wecht; L A Wuermser; J-J Wyndaele Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2008-10-28 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Ross S Chafetz; Lawrence C Vogel; Randal R Betz; John P Gaughan; Mary Jane Mulcahey Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2008 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Jill M Wecht; Andrei V Krassioukov; Maralee Alexander; John P Handrakis; Stephen L McKenna; Michael Kennelly; Michele Trbovich; Fin Biering-Sorensen; Stephen Burns; Stacy L Elliott; Daniel Graves; James Hamer; Klaus Krogh; Todd A Linsenmeyer; Nan Liu; Ellen Merete Hagen; Aaron A Phillips; Jean-Gabriel Previnaire; Gianna M Rodriguez; Chloe Slocum; James R Wilson Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2021
Authors: Amanda H X Lee; Aaron A Phillips; Jordan W Squair; Otto F Barak; Geoff B Coombs; Philip N Ainslie; Zoe K Sarafis; Tanja Mijacika; Diana Vucina; Zeljko Dujic; Andrei V Krassioukov Journal: Spinal Cord Ser Cases Date: 2017-12-28