Patricia Lampart1,2, Armin Gemperli2,3, Michael Baumberger1, Ines Bersch1, Birgit Prodinger2,3, Klaus Schmitt1, Anke Scheel-Sailer4,5. 1. Swiss Paraplegic Centre (SPC), Nottwil, Switzerland. 2. Department of Health Sciences and Health Policy, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland. 3. Swiss Paraplegic Research (SPF), Nottwil, Switzerland. 4. Swiss Paraplegic Centre (SPC), Nottwil, Switzerland. anke.scheel@paraplegie.ch. 5. Department of Health Sciences and Health Policy, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland. anke.scheel@paraplegie.ch.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart analysis. OBJECTIVES: To examine which professionals administered which assessment instruments in which patient in clinical practice during first rehabilitation after newly acquired spinal cord injury (SCI) and the differences in the frequencies of different assessments between patient groups. SETTING: Specialized SCI acute care and rehabilitation clinic. METHODS: Patients after SCI, aged 18 years and above, admitted for first rehabilitation between December 2014 and December 2015 were analyzed. Descriptive statistics of 54 selected assessments. p values based on the χ 2 test were calculated for assessments used in both paraplegic and tetraplegic patients. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen patients were screened. Forty-one assessments were administered, of which 10 on average more than once per patient. The most frequently used assessments were Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (7.7 times per patient), Skin Assessment (3.6 times), and Manual Muscle Test (3.2 times for Lower Extremities; 2.5 times for Upper Extremities). The American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale was administered on average 1.9 times per patient. More variation in the number of assessments per patient was observed in patients with complete and incomplete lesions compared to patients with paraplegia and tetraplegia. CONCLUSION: Assessments covering neurological functioning, mobility, and self-care are used in clinical practice during first rehabilitation of patients with SCI, while others covering autonomic functioning, pain, participation, or quality of life are still missing. Based on these observations and national and international requirements, a meaningful standard for an assessment toolkit, applicable in general and in specific subgroups, needs to be defined and implemented.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart analysis. OBJECTIVES: To examine which professionals administered which assessment instruments in which patient in clinical practice during first rehabilitation after newly acquired spinal cord injury (SCI) and the differences in the frequencies of different assessments between patient groups. SETTING: Specialized SCI acute care and rehabilitation clinic. METHODS:Patients after SCI, aged 18 years and above, admitted for first rehabilitation between December 2014 and December 2015 were analyzed. Descriptive statistics of 54 selected assessments. p values based on the χ 2 test were calculated for assessments used in both paraplegic and tetraplegic patients. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen patients were screened. Forty-one assessments were administered, of which 10 on average more than once per patient. The most frequently used assessments were Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (7.7 times per patient), Skin Assessment (3.6 times), and Manual Muscle Test (3.2 times for Lower Extremities; 2.5 times for Upper Extremities). The American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale was administered on average 1.9 times per patient. More variation in the number of assessments per patient was observed in patients with complete and incomplete lesions compared to patients with paraplegia and tetraplegia. CONCLUSION: Assessments covering neurological functioning, mobility, and self-care are used in clinical practice during first rehabilitation of patients with SCI, while others covering autonomic functioning, pain, participation, or quality of life are still missing. Based on these observations and national and international requirements, a meaningful standard for an assessment toolkit, applicable in general and in specific subgroups, needs to be defined and implemented.
Authors: Fin Biering-Sørensen; Susan Charlifue; Michael J Devivo; Stacie T Grinnon; Naomi Kleitman; Yun Lu; Joanne Odenkirchen Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2012
Authors: F Biering-Sørensen; M S Alexander; S Burns; S Charlifue; M DeVivo; V Dietz; A Krassioukov; R Marino; V Noonan; M W M Post; T Stripling; L Vogel; P Wing Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2010-11-09 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: F Biering-Sørensen; S Alai; K Anderson; S Charlifue; Y Chen; M DeVivo; A E Flanders; L Jones; N Kleitman; A Lans; V K Noonan; J Odenkirchen; J Steeves; K Tansey; E Widerström-Noga; L B Jakeman Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2015-02-10 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Mark N Hadley; Beverly C Walters; Bizhan Aarabi; Sanjay S Dhall; Daniel E Gelb; R John Hurlbert; Curtis J Rozzelle; Timothy C Ryken; Nicholas Theodore Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Martin W G Brinkhof; Christine Fekete; Jonviea D Chamberlain; Marcel W M Post; Armin Gemperli Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 2.912
Authors: Marcel W M Post; Martin W G Brinkhof; Erik von Elm; Christine Boldt; Mirjam Brach; Christine Fekete; Inge Eriks-Hoogland; Armin Curt; Gerold Stucki Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Kim Anderson; Sergio Aito; Michal Atkins; Fin Biering-Sørensen; Susan Charlifue; Armin Curt; John Ditunno; Clive Glass; Ralph Marino; Ruth Marshall; Mary Jane Mulcahey; Marcel Post; Gordana Savic; Giorgio Scivoletto; Amiram Catz Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2008 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Gale Whiteneck; Julie Gassaway; Marcel P Dijkers; Allen W Heinemann; Scott E D Kreider Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Anke Scheel-Sailer; Patricia Lampart; Melissa Selb; Michael Baumberger; Hans Peter Gmünder; Diana Sigrist-Nix; Klaus Schmitt; Gerold Stucki Journal: Front Rehabil Sci Date: 2021-09-13