Chafetz Ross S, Vogel Lawrence C, Betz Randal R, Gaughan John P, Mulcahey Mary Jane
Shriners Hospitals for Children, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19140, USA.
J Spinal Cord Med. 2008;31(5):538-42. doi: 10.1080/10790268.2008.11753649.
To evaluate the accuracy and agreement of International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISCSCI) classification and to determine the effectiveness of formal training for pediatric clinicians.
Participants (N = 28) in a formal 90-minute classification training session.
Pre/post-training examination of 10 case examples of a variety of neurological classifications.
Regardless of years of experience with the ISCSCI, a statistically significant improvement (P < 0.05) in classification was achieved after formal training. Before training, 27% (539 of 1,960) of the questions were answered incorrectly. After training, the percentage of incorrect classifications decreased to 11% (198 of 1,960) incorrect (P < 0.05). After training, the percentage of incorrect motor level classifications decreased by 23% (42% to 19% incorrect; P< 0.05). Post-training improvements were also demonstrated (P< 0.05) in classifying sensory levels (9% to 3% incorrect), neurological levels (31% to 6% incorrect), and severity of injury (9% to 0% incorrect). After training, reductions in classification errors (P < 0.05) were demonstrated in American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) A (from 20% to 7%), B (50% to 11%), C (71% to 46%), and D (63% to 16%).
This study demonstrated the benefits of formal, standardized training for accurate classification of the ISCSCI. Effective training programs must emphasize the guidelines and decision algorithms used to determine motor level and ASIA AIS designations because these remained problematic after training and are often a concern of patients/parents and are primary endpoints in clinical trials for neurological recovery.
评估脊髓损伤神经学分类国际标准(ISCSCI)分类的准确性和一致性,并确定针对儿科临床医生的正式培训的有效性。
参加90分钟正式分类培训课程的参与者(N = 28)。
对10个各种神经学分类的病例进行培训前/后的检查。
无论使用ISCSCI的经验年限如何,正式培训后分类有统计学上的显著改善(P < 0.05)。培训前,27%(1960个问题中的539个)回答错误。培训后,错误分类的百分比降至11%(1960个中的198个)错误(P < 0.05)。培训后,运动水平错误分类的百分比下降了23%(从42%降至19%错误;P < 0.05)。在感觉水平分类(从9%降至3%错误)、神经学水平分类(从31%降至6%错误)和损伤严重程度分类(从9%降至0%错误)方面,培训后也有改善(P < 0.05)。培训后,在美国脊髓损伤协会(ASIA)损伤量表(AIS)A(从20%降至7%)、B(从50%降至11%)、C(从71%降至46%)和D(从63%降至16%)的分类错误减少(P < 0.05)。
本研究证明了针对ISCSCI准确分类进行正式、标准化培训的益处。有效的培训计划必须强调用于确定运动水平和ASIA AIS指定的指南和决策算法,因为这些在培训后仍然存在问题,并且常常是患者/家长关注的问题,也是神经学恢复临床试验的主要终点。