Nerve transfer rehabilitation in tetraplegia: Comprehensive assessment and treatment program to improve upper extremity function before and after nerve transfer surgery, a case report

Reliability validity and responsiveness of the spinal cord independence measure 4th version in a multicultural setup

OBJECTIVE

To examine the fourth version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure for reliability and validity.

DESIGN

Partly blinded comparison with the criterion standard Spinal Cord Independence Measure III, and between examiners and examinations.

SETTING

A multicultural cohort from 19 spinal cord injury units in 11 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

Six hundred and forty-eight patients with spinal cord injury.

INTERVENTION

Assessment with Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM IV) and Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III) on admission to inpatient rehabilitation and before discharge.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

SCIM IV interrater reliability, internal consistency, correlation with and difference from SCIM III, and responsiveness.

RESULTS

Total agreement between examiners was above 80% on most SCIM IV tasks. All Kappa coefficients were above 0.70 and statistically significant (p<0.001). Pearson's coefficients of the correlation between the examiners were above 0.90, and intraclass correlation coefficients were above 0.90. Cronbach's alpha was above 0.96 for the entire SCIM IV, above 0.66 for the subscales, and usually decreased when an item was eliminated. Reliability values were lower for the subscale of respiration and sphincter management, and on admission than at discharge. SCIM IV and SCIM III mean values were very close, and the coefficients of Pearson correlation between them were 0.91-0.96 (p<0.001). The responsiveness of SCIM IV was not significantly different from that of SCIM III in most of the comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of SCIM IV, which was adjusted to assess specific patient conditions or situations that SCIM III does not address, and which includes more accurate definitions of certain scoring criteria, are very good and quite similar to those of SCIM III. SCIM IV can be used for clinical and research trials, including international multi-center studies, and its group scores can be compared with those of SCIM III.

Nerve transfers in tetraplegia: a review and practical guide

INTRODUCTION

Spinal cord injury (SCI) may lead to tetraplegia. Several nerve transfers have been successfully used for the restoration of the upper limb in tetraplegia. Reconstruction of an upper limb is individualized based on the functional level. In this study, the authors reviewed nerve transfers based on the injury level for the restoration of upper limb function in tetraplegia.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed this study to review nerve transfers in tetraplegia by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to identify relevant articles published through December 2020. We selected studies that reported cases in tetraplegia and extracted information on demographic data, clinical characteristics, operative details, and strength outcomes based on each injury level after surgery.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Total of 29 journal articles reporting on 275 nerve transfers in 172 upper limbs of 121 patients were included in the review. The mean time between SCI and nerve transfer surgery was 21.37 months (range: 4-156 months), and the follow-up time was 21.34 months (range: 3-38 months). The best outcomes were achieved for the restoration of wrist/finger extension and elbow extension.

CONCLUSIONS

Nerve transfer can provide a new function in tetraplegic patients' upper limbs to improve daily living activities. The type of surgical procedure should be performed based on the functional level of SCI and the individual's needs. Functional recovery occurs more in extensor muscles than flexors. Nerve transfer is a promising option in the reconstruction of upper limb function in tetraplegia.