Literature DB >> 8883187

Functional assessment of patients with spinal cord injury: measured by the motor score and the Functional Independence Measure.

T Ota1, K Akaboshi, M Nagata, S Sonoda, K Domen, M Seki, N Chino.   

Abstract

There is some information about the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) score of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI), but there are a few publications dealing with the relationship between the FIM score and the motor score of the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA). We have studied the relationship of all FIM items with the motor score, and reviewed the disability of patients with spinal cord injury in greater detail. The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics of impairment and disability in patients with SCI, using the FIM and motor score of the ASIA. The subjects were 100 inpatients with SCI (Frankel A, B). Neurological level, days from the onset, and the FIM were examined. In addition to these items, the ASIA motor scores were calculated for 22 tetraplegic patients. We investigated the relationships among these various respects. We also examined the changes of the physical items of the FIM score (physical FIM) over time for 18 patients. The mean FIM scores of those with tetraplegia with C4, C5, C6, C7, C8 lesions, and those with paraplegia with above T5 levels, and those below T6 were 35, 61, 82, 90, 116, 114 and 114 respectively. The FIM score reached the plateau in approximately 10 months, 6 months and 3 months post-injury, in tetraplegia, paraplegia above T5 and that below T6 respectively. The FIM scores in C6 patients were widely distributed from 56 to 104. On the other hand, the ASIA motor score could subdivide C6 patients and related well to the FIM score. The mean FIM scores for each neurological level were similar to those previously reported, thus they appeared to be plateau scores. With regard to the motor score, we feel that it could reflect the disability of the patients better than considering the neurological levels alone. Also considering the changes in the physical FIM score over time within a year from the onset of the injury, there were differences in the ADL improvement patterns among patients with different neurological levels. It appears that timing of the highest physical FIM improvement for each neurological level can exist. Thus it is important not to delay the start of the rehabilitation of patients with spinal cord injury in proper time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8883187     DOI: 10.1038/sc.1996.96

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spinal Cord        ISSN: 1362-4393            Impact factor:   2.772


  18 in total

1.  Client-centred assessment and the identification of meaningful treatment goals for individuals with a spinal cord injury.

Authors:  C Donnelly; J J Eng; J Hall; L Alford; R Giachino; K Norton; D S Kerr
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 2.  A systematic review of functional ambulation outcome measures in spinal cord injury.

Authors:  T Lam; V K Noonan; J J Eng
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2007-10-09       Impact factor: 2.772

3.  One-year follow-up of Chinese people with spinal cord injury: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Sam Chi Chung Chan; Alice Po Shan Chan
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.985

4.  The natural course of passive tenodesis grip in individuals with spinal cord injury with preserved wrist extension power but paralyzed fingers and thumbs.

Authors:  Hae Yoon Jung; Jieun Lee; Hyung Ik Shin
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 5.  A synthesis of best evidence for the restoration of upper-extremity function in people with tetraplegia.

Authors:  Sukhvinder Kalsi-Ryan; Mary C Verrier
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 1.037

Review 6.  Predictors of functional outcomes in adults with traumatic spinal cord injury following inpatient rehabilitation: A systematic review.

Authors:  Faisal AlHuthaifi; Joseph Krzak; Timothy Hanke; Lawrence C Vogel
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 1.985

7.  Pain following spinal cord injury: the impact on community reintegration.

Authors:  C Donnelly; J J Eng
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 2.772

8.  Functional recovery measures for spinal cord injury: an evidence-based review for clinical practice and research.

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

9.  Relationship of physical therapy inpatient rehabilitation interventions and patient characteristics to outcomes following spinal cord injury: the SCIRehab project.

Authors:  Laura Teeter; Julie Gassaway; Sally Taylor; Jacqueline LaBarbera; Shari McDowell; Deborah Backus; Jeanne M Zanca; Audrey Natale; Jordan Cabrera; Randall J Smout; Scott E D Kreider; Gale Whiteneck
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.985

10.  Relationship of occupational therapy inpatient rehabilitation interventions and patient characteristics to outcomes following spinal cord injury: the SCIRehab project.

Authors:  Rebecca Ozelie; Julie Gassaway; Emily Buchman; Deepa Thimmaiah; Lauren Heisler; Kara Cantoni; Teresa Foy; Ching-Hui Jean Hsieh; Randall J Smout; Scott E D Kreider; Gale Whiteneck
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.985

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.