Abstract
Design:
Multicenter cross sectional study.
Objectives:
Describe patient and caregiver knowledge of severity of injury and examine the relationship between AIS status and patient/caregiver report.
Setting:
United States
Methods:
Participants were between 1 and 21 years of age with a stable spinal cord injury (SCI). Participants underwent ISCSCI exams and were interviewed with the following questions: 1. Did the patient/caregiver know the difference between complete and incomplete spinal cord injury before participation? 2. What level of injury does the patient/caregiver report? 3. What severity of injury does the patient/caregiver report? 4. If a severity is given, who told them and how was it tested?
Results:
Overall, 16% of patients and 20% of caregivers knew the difference between complete and incomplete SCI. Older patients were more likely to know the difference and caregivers of patients with shorter durations of injury were more likely to know the difference. Those who reported a severity of injury different from their actual severity were more likely to have a complete spinal cord injury and a higher injury severity as measured by the AIS impairment scale. Only 18% of people who were able to report a severity of injury stated that an ISCSCI exam was how the doctor gave them the diagnosis.
Conclusion:
Many patients and caregivers do not understand the difference between complete and incomplete SCI. It is vital that an AIS diagnosis only be given following the ISCSCI exam based on agreed standards.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
American Spinal Injury Association. Standards for Classification of Spinal Injured Patients. American Spinal Injury Association: Chicago, 1992.
Frankel HL, Hancock DO, Hyslop G, Melzak J, Michaelis LS, Ungar GH et al. The value of postural reduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia. Paraplegia 1969; 7: 179–192.
American Spinal Injury Association. Standards for Classification of Spinal Injured Patients. American Spinal Injury Association: Chicago, 1982.
Marino RJ, Barros T, Biering-Sorensen F, Burns SP, Donovan WH, Graves DE et al. International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med 2003; 26 (Suppl 1): S50–S56.
Flanders AE, Spettell CM, Friedman DP, Marino RJ, Herbison GJ . The relationship between the functional abilities of patients with cervical spinal cord injury and the severity of damage revealed by MR imaging. Am J Neuroradiol 1999; 20: 926–934.
Shimada K, Tokioka T . Sequential MR studies of cervical cord injury: correlation with neurological damage and clinical outcome. Spinal Cord 1999; 37: 410–415.
Boldin C, Raith J, Fankhauser F, Haunschmid C, Schwantzer G, Schweighofer F . Predicting neurological recovery in cervical spinal cord injury with postoperative MR imaging. Spine 2006; 31: 554–559.
Flanders AE, Spettell CM, Tartaglino LM, Friedman DP, Herbison GJ . Forecasting motor recovery after cervical spinal cord injury: value of MR imaging. Radiology 1996; 201: 649–655.
Burns AS, Lee BS, Ditunno Jr JF, Tessler A . Patient selection for clinical trials: the reliability of the early spinal cord injury examination. J Neurotrauma 2003; 20: 477–482.
Bednarzcyk JH, Sanderson DJ . Comparison of functional and medical assessment in the classification of persons with spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Res Dev 1993; 30: 405–411.
Sett P, Crockard HA . The value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the follow-up management of spinal injury. Paraplegia 1991; 29: 396–410.
Betz RR, Gelman AJ, DeFilipp GJ, Mesgarzadeh M, Clancy M, Steel HH . Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of spinal cord injured children and adolescents. Paraplegia 1987; 25: 92–99.
Mulcahey MJ, Gaughan J, Betz RR, Johansen KJ . The international standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury: reliability of data when applied to children and youth. Spinal Cord 2007; 45: 452–459.
Chafetz R, Vogel L, Betz R, Mulcahey MJ . International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury: training effect on accurate classification. J Spinal Cord Med 2008; 31: 538–542.
Vogel LC, Samdani A, Chafetz R, Gaughan J, Betz RR, Mulcahey MJ . Intra-rater agreement of the anorectal exam and classification of injury severity in children with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord (advance online publication, 3 February 2009).
Mange K, Ditunno J, Herbison G, Jaweed M . Recovery of strength at the zone of injury in motor complete and motor incomplete cervical spinal cord injured patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1990; 71: 562–565.
Wu L, Marino R, Herbison G, Ditunno J . Recovery of zero-grade muscles in the zone of partial preservation in motor complete Quadriplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73: 40–43.
Backe HA, Betz RR, Mesgarzadeh M, Beck T, Clancy M . Post-traumatic spinal cord cysts evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging. Paraplegia 1991; 29: 607–612.
Brillhart B, Stewart A . Education as the key to rehabilitation. Nurs Clin North Am 1989; 24: 675–680.
Potter P, Wolfe D, Burkell J, Hayes K . Challenges in educating individuals with SCI to reduce secondary conditions. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2004; 10: 30–40.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the Shriners Hospitals for Children Research Advisory Grant no. 8956 (Mulcahey, PI).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schottler, J., Vogel, L., Chafetz, R. et al. Patient and caregiver knowledge of severity of injury among youth with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 48, 34–38 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2009.74
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2009.74
