Tamburella Federica, Lorusso Matteo, Merone Mario, Bacco Luca, Molinari Marco, Tramontano Marco, Scivoletto Giorgio, Tagliamonte Nevio Luigi
Santa Lucia Foundation IRCCS, 00143 Rome, Italy.
Department of Life Sciences, Health and Health Professions, University Link Campus of Rome, 00165 Rome, Italy.
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Sep 13;12(18):1840. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12181840.
Several technologies have been introduced into neurorehabilitation programs to enhance traditional treatment of individuals with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI). Their effectiveness has been widely investigated, but their adoption has not been properly quantified. The aim of this study is to assess the distribution of conventional (Treatment As Usual-TAU) and technology-aided (Treatment With Technologies-TWT) treatments conveniently grouped based on different therapeutic goals in a selected SCI unit. Data from 104 individuals collected in 29 months were collected in a custom database and categorized according to both the conventional American Impairment Scale classification and a newly developed Multifactor (MF) clustering approach that considers additional sources of information (the lesion level, the level of independence in the activities of daily living, and the hospitalization duration). Results indicated an average technology adoption of about 30%. Moreover, the MF clusters were less overlapped, and the differences in TWT adoption were more pronounced than in AIS-based clustering. MF clustering was capable of grouping individuals based both on neurological features and functional abilities. In particular, individuals with motor complete injuries were grouped together, whereas individuals with sensorimotor incomplete SCI were collected separately based on the lesion level. As regards TWT adoption, we found that in the case of motor complete SCI, TWT for muscle tone control and modulation was mainly selected (about 90% of TWT), while the other types of TWT were seldom adopted. Even for individuals with incomplete SCI, the most frequent rehabilitation goal was muscle tone modulation (about 75% of TWT), regardless of the AIS level, and technologies to improve walking ability (about 12% of TWT) and balance control (about 10% of TWT) were mainly used for individuals with thoracic or lumbar lesions. Analyzing TAU distribution, we found that the highest adoption of muscle tone modulation strategies was reported in the case of individuals with motor complete SCI (about 42% of TAU), that is, in cases when almost no gait training was pursued (about 1% of TAU). In the case of cervical motor incomplete SCI, compared to thoracic and lumbar incomplete SCI, there was a greater focus on muscle tone control and force recruitment in addition to walking training (38% and 14% of TAU, respectively) than on balance training. Overall, the MF clustering provided more insights than the traditional AIS-based classification, highlighting differences in TWT adoption. These findings suggest that a wider overview that considers both neurological and functional characteristics of individuals after SCI based on a multifactor analysis could enhance the personalization of neurorehabilitation strategies.
几种技术已被引入神经康复项目,以加强对脊髓损伤(SCI)患者的传统治疗。其有效性已得到广泛研究,但其应用情况尚未得到恰当量化。本研究的目的是评估在一个选定的SCI治疗单元中,基于不同治疗目标方便分组的传统治疗(常规治疗 - TAU)和技术辅助治疗(技术辅助治疗 - TWT)的分布情况。在29个月内收集的104名患者的数据被录入一个自定义数据库,并根据传统的美国损伤量表分类以及一种新开发的多因素(MF)聚类方法进行分类,该方法考虑了额外的信息来源(损伤水平、日常生活活动的独立程度以及住院时间)。结果表明技术的平均采用率约为30%。此外,MF聚类的重叠较少,TWT采用情况的差异在基于MF聚类时比基于美国损伤量表(AIS)聚类时更为明显。MF聚类能够根据神经学特征和功能能力对个体进行分组。具体而言,运动完全损伤的个体被归为一组,而感觉运动不完全性SCI的个体则根据损伤水平分别收集。关于TWT的采用情况,我们发现对于运动完全性SCI患者,主要选择用于肌肉张力控制和调节的TWT(约占TWT的90%),而很少采用其他类型的TWT。即使对于不完全性SCI患者,无论AIS水平如何,最常见的康复目标也是肌肉张力调节(约占TWT的75%),而用于改善步行能力(约占TWT的12%)和平衡控制(约占TWT的10%)的技术主要用于胸段或腰段损伤的患者。分析TAU的分布情况,我们发现运动完全性SCI患者中肌肉张力调节策略的采用率最高(约占TAU的42%),即在几乎不进行步态训练的情况下(约占TAU的1%)。在颈段运动不完全性SCI患者中,与胸段和腰段不完全性SCI相比,除了步行训练外,更注重肌肉张力控制和力量募集(分别占TAU的38%和14%),而不是平衡训练。总体而言,MF聚类比传统的基于AIS的分类提供了更多见解,突出了TWT采用情况的差异。这些发现表明,基于多因素分析考虑SCI患者神经学和功能特征的更全面概述可以增强神经康复策略的个性化。