Abstract
Objective:
Compare rehabilitation after spinal cord lesions (SCL) in different countries.
Design:
Multicenter comparative study.
Setting:
Four spinal rehabilitation units, in Denmark, Russia, Lithuania and Israel.
Subjects:
199 SCL patients.
Interventions:
Information was collected about unit properties, rehabilitation objectives, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scale and spinal cord independence measure (SCIM) assessments, and patient data. χ2-test, t-test, ANOVA and ANCOVA were used for statistical analysis.
Main outcome measures:
Time from lesion onset to admission for rehabilitation (TAR), length of stay in rehabilitation (LOS), SCIM and spinal cord ability realization measurement index (SCI-ARMI) scores, SCIM gain, SCI-ARMI gain and rehabilitation efficiency (RE).
Results:
Differences were found between the units in rehabilitation objectives, facilities and special equipment for rehabilitation. Staff/bed ratio was 1.7 in Lithuania and Denmark, 1.1 in Israel and 0.9 in Russia. Russian patients were the youngest and had the most severe lesions among participating units. Admission SCIM and SCI-ARMI were the lowest in Israel: 25.1±17.2 and 34.3±17.3. TAR was highest in Russia (12.4 month) and lowest in Israel (2 weeks; P<0.01). LOS was longest in Denmark (176.9 days; P<0.001). SCIM score at the end of rehabilitation was highest in Denmark (67.3±23). SCIM gain and SCI ARMI gain were highest in Israel (36.9±18.3 and 38.5±19.4, respectively) and lowest in Russia (P<0.001). RE was highest in Lithuania and lowest in Denmark (P<0.001).
Conclusions:
In the participating units, SCL rehabilitation outcomes depend on SCL severity and unit-specific properties. A moderately delayed rehabilitation with long LOS achieved high functioning, and early or slightly delayed rehabilitation combined with shorter LOS achieved high functional gain or efficiency.
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
Eastwood EA, Hagglund KJ, Ragnarsson KT, Gordon WA, Marino RJ . Medical rehabilitation length of stay and outcomes for persons with traumatic spinal cord injury—1990–1997. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 1457–1463.
Sumida M, Fujimoto M, Tokuhiro A, Tominaga T, Magara A, Uchida R . Early rehabilitation effect for traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 391–395.
Stineman MG, Marino RJ, Deutsch A, Granger CV, Maislin G . A functional strategy for classifying patients after traumatic spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 1999; 37: 717–725.
Bode RK, Heinemann AW . Course of functional improvement after stroke, spinal cord injury, and traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: 100–108.
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.
Ones K, Yilmaz E, Beydogan A, Gultekin O, Caglar N . Comparison of functional results in non-traumatic and traumatic spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil 2007; 29: 1185–1191.
Bracken MB, Holford TR . Neurological and functional status 1 year after acute spinal cord injury: estimates of functional recovery in National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study II from results modeled in National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study III. J Neurosurg 2002; 96 (3 Suppl): 259–266.
Ronen J, Itzkovich M, Bluvshtein V, Taleysnik M, Gelernter I, David R et al. Length of stay in hospital following spinal cord lesions in Israel. Spinal Cord 2004; 42: 353–358.
Itzkovich M, Gelernter I, Biering-Sorensen F, Weeks C, Laramee MT, Craven BC et al. The Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) version III: Reliability and validity in a multi-center international study. Disabil Rehabil 2007; 29: 1926–1933.
Catz A, Greenberg E, Itzkovich M, Bluvshtein V, Ronen J, Gelernter I . A new instrument for outcome assessment in rehabilitation medicine: spinal cord injury ability realization measurement index (SCI-ARMI). Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 399–404.
Catz A, Itzkovich M . Spinal cord independence measure: comprehensive ability rating scale for the spinal cord lesion patient. J Rehabil Res Dev 2007; 44: 65–68.
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; 24: 179–192.
Chan SC, Chan AP . Rehabilitation outcomes following traumatic spinal cord injury in a tertiary spinal cord injury centre: a comparison with an international standard. Spinal Cord 2005; 43: 489–498.
Morrison SA, Stanwyck DJ . The effect of shorter length of stay on functional outcomes of spinal cord injury rehabilitation. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 1999; 4: 44–55.
Yarkony GM, Roth EJ, Heinemann AW, Wu YC, Katz RT, Lovell L . Benefits of rehabilitation for traumatic spinal cord injury. Multivariate analysis in 711 patients. Arch Neurol 1987; 44: 93–96.
Marino RJ, Ditunno Jr JF, Donovan WH, Maynard Jr F . Neurologic recovery after traumatic spinal cord injury: data from the model spinal cord injury system. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 1391–1396.
Tchvaloon E, Front L, Gelernter I, Ronen J, Bluvshtein V, Catz A . Survival, neurological recovery, and morbidity after spinal cord injuries following road accidents in Israel. Spinal Cord 2008; 46: 145–149.
Pagliacci MC, Celani MG, Zampolini M, Spizzichino L, Franceschini M, Baratta S, et al., Gruppo Italiano Studio Epidemiologico Mielolesioni. An Italian survey of traumatic spinal cord injury. The Gruppo Italiano Studio Epidemiologico Mielolesioni study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 84: 1266–1275.
DeVivo MJ, Kartus PL, Stover SL, Fine PR . Benefits of early admission to an organized spinal cord injury care system. Paraplegia 1990; 28: 545–555.
Scivoletto G, Morganti B, Molinari M . Early versus delayed inpatient spinal cord injury rehabilitation: an Italian study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 512–516.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fromovich-Amit, Y., Biering-Sørensen, F., Baskov, V. et al. Properties and outcomes of spinal rehabilitation units in four countries. Spinal Cord 47, 597–603 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2008.178
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2008.178
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Exploring the contextual transition from spinal cord injury rehabilitation to the home environment: a qualitative study
Spinal Cord (2021)
-
Traumatic spinal cord injury in Italy 20 years later: current epidemiological trend and early predictors of rehabilitation outcome
Spinal Cord (2020)
-
Psychological outcomes of MRSA isolation in spinal cord injury rehabilitation
Spinal Cord Series and Cases (2020)
-
Is admission to an SCI specialized rehabilitation facility associated with better functional outcomes? Analysis of data from the Thai Spinal Cord Injury Registry
Spinal Cord (2019)
-
Outcome after post-acute spinal cord specific rehabilitation: a German single center study
Spinal Cord Series and Cases (2017)
