Hoskin Jordan D, Miyatani Masae, Craven B Catharine
a Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-UHN , Brain and Spinal Cord Rehabilitation Program , Toronto , Ontario , Canada.
b Department of Kinesiology , University of Waterloo , Waterloo , Ontario , Canada.
J Spinal Cord Med. 2018 Jul;41(4):479-489. doi: 10.1080/10790268.2017.1301622. Epub 2017 Mar 30.
Carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) may be used increasingly as a cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening tool in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) as other routine invasive diagnostic tests are often unfeasible. However, variation in cIMT acquisition and analysis methods is an issue in the current published literature. The growth of the field is dependent on cIMT quality acquisition and analysis to ensure accurate reporting of CVD risk. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the quality of the reported methodology used to collect cIMT values in SCI.
Data from 12 studies, which measured cIMT in individuals with SCI, were identified from the Medline, Embase and CINAHL databases. The quality of the reported methodologies was scored based on adherence to cIMT methodological guidelines abstracted from two consensus papers.
Five studies were scored as 'moderate quality' in methodological reporting, having specified 9 to 11 of 15 quality reporting criterion. The remaining seven studies were scored as 'low quality', having reported less than 9 of 15 quality reporting criterion. No study had methodological reporting that was scored as 'high quality'. The overall reporting of quality methodology was poor in the published SCI literature.
A greater adherence to current methodological guidelines is needed to advance the field of cIMT in SCI. Further research is necessary to refine cIMT acquisition and analysis guidelines to aid authors designing research and journals in screening manuscripts for publication.
由于其他常规侵入性诊断测试往往不可行，颈动脉内膜中层厚度（cIMT）可能越来越多地被用作脊髓损伤（SCI）患者心血管疾病（CVD）的筛查工具。然而，cIMT采集和分析方法的差异是当前已发表文献中的一个问题。该领域的发展取决于cIMT的高质量采集和分析，以确保准确报告CVD风险。本研究的目的是评估在SCI中用于收集cIMT值的报告方法的质量。
从Medline、Embase和CINAHL数据库中识别出12项测量SCI患者cIMT的研究数据。根据从两篇共识论文中提取的cIMT方法指南，对报告方法的质量进行评分。
五项研究在方法学报告中被评为“中等质量”，明确了15项质量报告标准中的9至11项。其余七项研究被评为“低质量”，报告的质量报告标准少于15项中的9项。没有一项研究的方法学报告被评为“高质量”。已发表的SCI文献中质量方法的总体报告较差。
需要更严格地遵守当前的方法指南，以推动SCI中cIMT领域的发展。有必要进行进一步的研究，以完善cIMT采集和分析指南，帮助设计研究的作者和筛选稿件以供发表的期刊。
