Literature DB >> 8863191

MASCIS evaluation of open field locomotor scores: effects of experience and teamwork on reliability. Multicenter Animal Spinal Cord Injury Study.

D M Basso1, M S Beattie, J C Bresnahan, D K Anderson, A I Faden, J A Gruner, T R Holford, C Y Hsu, L J Noble, R Nockels, P L Perot, S K Salzman, W Young.   

Abstract

The Multicenter Animal Spinal Cord Injury Study (MASCIS) adopted a modified 21-point open field locomotor scale developed by Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan (BBB) at Ohio State University (OSU) to measure motor recovery in spinal-injured rats. BBB scores categorize combinations of rat hindlimb movements, trunk position and stability, stepping, coordination, paw placement, toe clearance, and tail position, representing sequential recovery stages that rats attain after spinal cord injury. A total of 22 observers from 8 participating centers assessed 18 hindlimbs of 9 rats at 2-6 weeks after graded spinal cord injury. The observers were segregated into 10 teams. The teams were grouped into 3 cohorts (A, B, and C), consisting of one experienced team from OSU and two non-OSU teams. The cohorts evaluated the rats in three concurrent and sequential sessions. After viewing a rat for 4 min, individual observers first assigned scores without discussion. Members of each team then discussed and assigned a team score. Experience (OSU vs. non-OSU) and teamwork (individual vs. team) had no significant effect on mean scores although the mean scores of one cohort differed significantly from the others (p = 0.0002, ANOVA). However, experience and teamwork significantly influenced reliability of scoring. OSU team scores had a mean standard deviation or discordance of 0.59 points, significantly less than 1.31 points for non-OSU team scores (p = 0.003, ANOVA) and 1.30 points for non-OSU individual scores (p = 0.001, ANOVA). Discordances were greater at the upper and lower ends of the scale, exceeding 2.0 in the lower (< 5) and upper (> 15) ends of the scale but were < 1.0 for scores between 4 and 16. Comparisons of non-OSU and OSU team scores indicated a high reliability coefficient of 0.892 and a correlation index (r2) of 0.894. These results indicate that inexperienced observers can learn quickly to assign consistent BBB scores that approach those given by experienced teams, that the scores are most consistent between 4 and 16, and that experience improves consistency of team scores.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8863191     DOI: 10.1089/neu.1996.13.343

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurotrauma        ISSN: 0897-7151            Impact factor:   5.269


  137 in total

1.  Recovery from chronic spinal cord contusion after Nogo receptor intervention.

Authors:  Xingxing Wang; Philip Duffy; Aaron W McGee; Omar Hasan; Grahame Gould; Nathan Tu; Noam Y Harel; Yiyun Huang; Richard E Carson; David Weinzimmer; Jim Ropchan; Larry I Benowitz; William B J Cafferty; Stephen M Strittmatter
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 10.422

Review 2.  Bone marrow stem cells and polymer hydrogels--two strategies for spinal cord injury repair.

Authors:  Eva Syková; Pavla Jendelová; Lucia Urdzíková; Petr Lesný; Ales Hejcl
Journal:  Cell Mol Neurobiol       Date:  2006-04-22       Impact factor: 5.046

3.  Versatile robotic interface to evaluate, enable and train locomotion and balance after neuromotor disorders.

Authors:  Nadia Dominici; Urs Keller; Heike Vallery; Lucia Friedli; Rubia van den Brand; Michelle L Starkey; Pavel Musienko; Robert Riener; Grégoire Courtine
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 53.440

4.  Development of AMPA receptor and GABA B receptor-sensitive spinal hyper-reflexia after spinal air embolism in rat: a systematic neurological, electrophysiological and qualitative histopathological study.

Authors:  Osamu Kakinohana; Miriam Scadeng; Jose A Corleto; Juraj Sevc; Nadezda Lukacova; Martin Marsala
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 5.330

5.  Validity of acute and chronic tactile sensory testing after spinal cord injury in rats.

Authors:  Megan Ryan Detloff; Leslie M Clark; Karen J Hutchinson; Anne D Kloos; Lesley C Fisher; D Michele Basso
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 5.330

6.  Neuronal and glial apoptosis after traumatic spinal cord injury.

Authors:  X Z Liu; X M Xu; R Hu; C Du; S X Zhang; J W McDonald; H X Dong; Y J Wu; G S Fan; M F Jacquin; C Y Hsu; D W Choi
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-07-15       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Aspiration of a cervical spinal contusion injury in preparation for delayed peripheral nerve grafting does not impair forelimb behavior or axon regeneration.

Authors:  Harra R Sandrow; Jed S Shumsky; Arthi Amin; John D Houle
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  2007-12-15       Impact factor: 5.330

8.  Changes in Gene Expression and Metabolism in the Testes of the Rat following Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Ryan D Fortune; Raymond J Grill; Christine Beeton; Mark Tanner; Redwan Huq; David S Loose
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2016-12-02       Impact factor: 5.269

9.  Characterizing phospholipase A2-induced spinal cord injury-a comparison with contusive spinal cord injury in adult rats.

Authors:  Nai-Kui Liu; William Lee Titsworth; Yi Ping Zhang; Aurela I Xhafa; Christopher B Shields; Xiao-Ming Xu
Journal:  Transl Stroke Res       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 6.829

10.  Long-term Follow-up of Cutaneous Hypersensitivity in Rats with a Spinal Cord Contusion.

Authors:  Ji-In Jung; Junesun Kim; Seung Kil Hong; Young Wook Yoon
Journal:  Korean J Physiol Pharmacol       Date:  2008-12-31       Impact factor: 2.016

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.