Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Original article

Vol. 150 No. 2930 (2020)

Examinations and assessments in patients with a newly acquired spinal cord injury – retrospective chart analysis as part of a quality improvement project

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2020.20291
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2020;150:w20291
Published
30.07.2020

Summary

AIMS OF THE STUDY

Examinations and assessments can be used to ensure good quality rehabilitation. Within the framework of a quality improvement project, the aims of the current analysis were: first, to analyse the time points of selected examinations and assessments in the rehabilitation process of patients with a newly acquired spinal cord injury. Second, to identify differences between the subgroups with different aetiologies, levels and completeness of spinal cord injuries. And third, to compare the examinations and assessments performed with the guideline recommendations and to use discrepancies as a starting point for a quality improvement project.

METHODS

In this retrospective chart analysis, adult patients with a newly acquired spinal cord injury who were admitted to a single specialised acute care and rehabilitation clinic for their first rehabilitation between December 2013 and December 2014 were included and assessed until discharge. The main objective was to assess the time to examinations or assessments after injury or hospital admission in comparison to the respective recommendations. Analyses were done using time-to-event analysis and represented graphically using Kaplan-Meier plots.

RESULTS

Of the 105 patients included in this study (median age 58 years, 29% female), 61% had a traumatic and 39% a non-traumatic spinal cord injury; 39% were paraplegic and 61% were quadriplegic; and 59% had a motor complete and 41% a sensor-motor incomplete spinal cord injury. The percentage of patients for whom the respective assessment or examination was performed and the percentage of these patients for whom it performed within the recommended time were: 90% and 71% for magnetic resonance imaging; 85% and 90% for computed tomography; 87% and 79% for the manual muscle test; 95% and 59% for the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord (ISNCSCI); 84% and 50% for electrophysiological assessment; 73% and 90% for urodynamic testing; and 49% and 53% for lung function testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest a relevant gap between recommendations and clinical routine for time to some assessments after spinal cord injury. Within the framework of a quality improvement project, the next steps should be to build a national and international consensus on specific time frames for examinations and assessments in patients with a newly acquired spinal cord injury and thereafter, to develop an institutional implementation strategy.

References

  1. Maritz R, Scheel-Sailer A, Schmitt K, Prodinger B. Overview of quality management models for inpatient healthcare settings. A scoping review. Int J Qual Heal Care. 2018.
  2. Steiner WA, Ryser L, Huber E, Uebelhart D, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Use of the ICF model as a clinical problem-solving tool in physical therapy and rehabilitation medicine. Phys Ther. 2002;82(11):1098–107. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/82.11.1098
  3. Meyer T, Gutenbrunner C, Bickenbach J, Cieza A, Melvin J, Stucki G. Towards a conceptual description of rehabilitation as a health strategy. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(9):765–9. doi:.https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0865
  4. Stucki G, Sangha O. Clinical quality management: putting the pieces together. Arthritis Care Res. 1996;9(5):405–12. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1002/1529-0131(199610)9:5<405::AID-ANR1790090510>3.0.CO;2-2
  5. Uitz E, Fransen J, Langenegger T, Stucki G ; Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Clinical quality management in rheumatoid arthritis: putting theory into practice. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2000;39(5):542–9. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/39.5.542
  6. Nelson EC, Godfrey MM, Batalden PB, Berry SA, Bothe AE, Jr, McKinley KE, et al. Clinical microsystems, part 1. The building blocks of health systems. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34(7):367–78. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(08)34047-1
  7. Wasson JH, Anders SG, Moore LG, Ho L, Nelson EC, Godfrey MM, et al. Clinical microsystems, part 2. Learning from micro practices about providing patients the care they want and need. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34(8):445–52. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(08)34055-0
  8. Kirchberger I, Cieza A, Biering-Sørensen F, Baumberger M, Charlifue S, Post MW, et al. ICF Core Sets for individuals with spinal cord injury in the early post-acute context. Spinal Cord. 2010;48(4):297–304. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2009.128
  9. Fehlings MG, Tetreault LA, Wilson JR, Kwon BK, Burns AS, Martin AR, et al. A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Acute Spinal Cord Injury: Introduction, Rationale, and Scope. Global Spine J. 2017;7(3, Suppl):84S–94S. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568217703387
  10. Curt A, Van Hedel HJA, Klaus D, Dietz V ; EM-SCI Study Group. Recovery from a spinal cord injury: significance of compensation, neural plasticity, and repair. J Neurotrauma. 2008;25(6):677–85. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2007.0468
  11. Chhabra HS. ISCoS textbook on comprehensive management of spinal cord injuries. First edition. New Delhi: Wolters Kluwer; 2015.
  12. Biering-Sørensen F, Alai S, Anderson K, Charlifue S, Chen Y, DeVivo M, et al. Common data elements for spinal cord injury clinical research: a National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke project. Spinal Cord. 2015;53(4):265–77. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2014.246
  13. Noonan VK, Kwon BK, Soril L, Fehlings MG, Hurlbert RJ, Townson A, et al.; RHSCIR Network. The Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry (RHSCIR): a national patient-registry. Spinal Cord. 2012;50(1):22–7. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2011.109
  14. Post MWM, Brinkhof MWG, von Elm E, Boldt C, Brach M, Fekete C, et al.; SwiSCI study group. Design of the Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Cohort Study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;90(11, Suppl 2):S5–16. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0b013e318230fd41
  15. Cieza A, Boldt C, Ballert CS, Eriks-Hoogland I, Bickenbach JE, Stucki G. Setting up a cohort study on functioning: deciding what to measure. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;90(11, Suppl 2):S17–28. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0b013e318230fddb
  16. Mueller G, de Groot S, van der Woude LH, Perret C, Michel F, Hopman MT. Prediction models and development of an easy to use open-access tool for measuring lung function of individuals with motor complete spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med. 2012;44(8):642–7. doi:.https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1011
  17. Scheel-Sailer A. Rehabilitation der unteren Extremität, der Steh- und Gehfunktion von Menschen mit Querschnittlähmung. AMWF. 2018:179-009.
  18. Böthig R. Querschnittgelähmte Patienten, neuro-urologische Versorgung. AWMF. 2016:179-001.
  19. Lampart P, Gemperli A, Baumberger M, Bersch I, Prodinger B, Schmitt K, et al. Administration of assessment instruments during the first rehabilitation of patients with spinal cord injury: a retrospective chart analysis. Spinal Cord. 2018;56(4):322–31. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-017-0039-x
  20. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP ; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg. 2014;12(12):1495–9. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.013
  21. Chamberlain JD, Ronca E, Brinkhof MW. Estimating the incidence of traumatic spinal cord injuries in Switzerland: Using administrative data to identify potential coverage error in a cohort study. Swiss Med Wkly. 2017;147:w14430.
  22. EMSCI. International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI).
  23. Walters BC, Hadley MN, Hurlbert RJ, Aarabi B, Dhall SS, Gelb DE, et al.; American Association of Neurological Surgeons; Congress of Neurological Surgeons. Guidelines for the management of acute cervical spine and spinal cord injuries: 2013 update. Neurosurgery. 2013;60(CN_suppl_1):82–91. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000430319.32247.7f
  24. Kahn JH, Tappan R, Newman CP, Palma P, Romney W, Tseng Stultz E, et al. Outcome Measure Recommendations From the Spinal Cord Injury EDGE Task Force. Phys Ther. 2016;96(11):1832–42. doi:.https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20150453
  25. Betz R, Biering-Sørensen F, Burns SP, Donovan W, Graves DE, Guest J, et al., ASIA and ISCoS International Standards Committee. The 2019 revision of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI)-What’s new? Spinal Cord. 2019;57(10):815–7. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-019-0350-9
  26. Eng JJ, Teasell R, Miller WC, Wolfe DL, Townson AF, Aubut JA, et al.; the SCIRE Research Team. Spinal cord injury rehabilitation evidence: Method of the SCIRE systematic review. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2007;13(1):1–10. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1310/sci1301-1
  27. EMSCI. European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury [Internet]. Available from: https://www.emsci.org/index.php
  28. Curt A, Dietz V. Electrophysiological recordings in patients with spinal cord injury: significance for predicting outcome. Spinal Cord. 1999;37(3):157–65. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.sc.3100809
  29. Raab AM, Krebs J, Perret C, Pfister M, Hopman M, Mueller G. Evaluation of a clinical implementation of a respiratory muscle training group during spinal cord injury rehabilitation. Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2018;4(1):40. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41394-018-0069-4
  30. R Core T. R. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2018 [cited 2019 Jan 14]; Available from: https://www.r-project.org/
  31. Rupp R ; ASIA International Standards Committee; ASIA Education Committee. Assessor accuracy of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI)-recommendations for reporting items. Spinal Cord. 2018;56(8):819–20. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-018-0133-8
  32. Schuld C, Franz S, van Hedel HJA, Moosburger J, Maier D, Abel R, et al.; EMSCI study group. International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury: classification skills of clinicians versus computational algorithms. Spinal Cord. 2015;53(4):324–31. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2014.221
  33. Pavese C, Schneider MP, Schubert M, Curt A, Scivoletto G, Finazzi-Agrò E, et al. Prediction of Bladder Outcomes after Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury: A Longitudinal Cohort Study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(6):e1002041. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002041
  34. Raab AM, Krebs J, Perret C, Michel F, Hopman MT, Mueller G. Maximum Inspiratory Pressure is a Discriminator of Pneumonia in Individuals With Spinal-Cord Injury. Respir Care. 2016;61(12):1636–43. doi:.https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.04818
  35. Pannek J, Kullik B. Does optimizing bladder management equal optimizing quality of life? Correlation between health-related quality of life and urodynamic parameters in patients with spinal cord lesions. Urology. 2009;74(2):263–6. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.02.047
  36. Brommer B, Engel O, Kopp MA, Watzlawick R, Müller S, Prüss H, et al. Spinal cord injury-induced immune deficiency syndrome enhances infection susceptibility dependent on lesion level. Brain. 2016;139(3):692–707. doi:.https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awv375
  37. Mueller G, de Groot S, van der Woude L, Hopman MTE. Time-courses of lung function and respiratory muscle pressure generating capacity after spinal cord injury: a prospective cohort study. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40(4):269–76. doi:.https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0162