Discriminative ability of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III on levels of independence among ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Aug 9, 2021
Keywords:
Clinical tool Rehabilitation Neurology Mobility Burden of care

Main Article Content

Narongsak Khamnon
School of physical therapy, Faculty of medical associated science, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.; Improvement of Physical Performance and Quality of Life (IPQ) Research group, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Nisara Musika
Department of rehabilitation, Faculty of medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Panumas Jitmongkolsri
Department of orthopedics, Khon Kaen hospital, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Napaporn Kongngen
Maehongson Special Education Center, Bureau of Special Education Administration, Ministry of Education, Maehongson, Thailand.
Manatsavee Haisirikul
Physical therapy, Department of rehabilitation, Buri Ram hospital, Buri Ram, Thailand.
Kittiyaporn Jaikarsen
Occupational therapy, Department of rehabilitation, Buri Ram hospital, Buri Ram, Thailand.
Sugalya Amatachaya
School of physical therapy, Faculty of medical associated science, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.; Improvement of Physical Performance and Quality of Life (IPQ) Research group, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.

Abstract

Spinal Cord Independence Measure ( SCIM) III has been proposed as a test battery to discriminate independence of individuals with spinal cord injury ( SCI) . However, there is no clear evidence to support this claim. This study compared the SCIM III scores among 45 ambulatory individuals with SCI who had different levels of independence. Eligible participants were assessed for their demographics, SCI characteristics, and SCIM III scores (Thai version). The requirement of external assistance and/or devices while completing the tasks of SCIM III were used to categorize the participants into three groups (15 participants/group), including
need assistance, modified independence (MoID) , and independence ( ID). The differences among the groups were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. The findings indicated significant differences in the total and subscale SCIM III scores among the three groups (pvalue < 0. 05) , except the respiration and sphincter management between the MoID and ID participants (p-value > 0.05). The current findings clearly confirmed the use of SCIM III scores to discriminate and monitor independence among ambulatory individuals of SCI.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Khamnon N, Musika N, Jitmongkolsri P, Kongngen N, Haisirikul M, Jaikarsen K, Amatachaya S. Discriminative ability of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III on levels of independence among ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury. Arch AHS [Internet]. 2021 Aug. 9 [cited 2024 Dec. 19];33(3):9-15. Available from: https://he01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ams/article/view/247748
Issue
Vol. 33 No. 3 (2021): September - December
Section
Original article
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

1. Groah SL, Charlifue S, Tate D, Jensen MP, Molton IR, Forchheimer M, et al. Spinal cord injury and aging: challenges and recommendations for future research. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2012; 91: 80-93.
2. Haisma JA, Bussmann JB, Stam HJ, Sluis TA, Bergen MP, Dallmeijer AJ, et al. Changes in physical capacity during and after inpatient rehabilitation in subjects with a spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87: 741-8.
3. Nas K, Yazmalar L, Abdulkadir A. Rehabilitation of spinal cord injuries. World J Orthop 2015; 18; 6(1): 8-16
4. Sezer N, Akku S, Ugurlu FG F. Chronic complications of spinal cord injury. World J Orthop 2015; 18: 24-33.
5. Jackson AB, Carnel CT, Ditunno JF, Read MS, Boninger ML, Schmerler MR, et al. Outcome measure for gait and ambulation in the spinal cord injury population. J Spinal Cord Med 2008; 31: 487-99.
6. Wannapakhe J, Saensook W, Keawjoho C, Amatachaya S. Reliability and discriminative ability of the spinal cord independence measure III (Thai version). Spinal Cord 2016; 54(3): 213-20.
7. Catz A, Itzkovich M. Spinal cord independence measure: comprehensive ability rating scale for the spinal cord lesion patient. J Rehabil Res Dev 2007; 44: 65-7.
8. Wannapakhe J, Amatachaya S. Correlation between Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (Thai version) and Timed Up and Go Test in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury. J Assoc Med Sci 2016; 50: 229-35
9. Behrman AL, Harkema SJ. Locomotor training after human spinal sord injury: a series of case studies. Phys Ther 2000; 80: 688-700.
10. Quinn TJ, Langhorne P, Stott DJ. Barthel Index for stroke trials development, properties, and application. Stroke 2011; 42: 1146-51.
11. Catz A, Itzkovich M. Spinal Cord Independence Measure: Comprehensive ability rating scale for the spinal cord lesion patient. J Rehabil Res Dev 2007; 44: 65-8.
12. Maynard FM Jr, Bracken MB, Creasey G, Ditunno JF Jr, Donovan WH, Ducker TB, et al. International Standards for Neurological and Functional Classification of Spinal Cord Injury. American Spinal Injury Association. Spinal Cord 1997; 35: 266-74.
13. Unalan H, Misirlioglu TO, Erhan B, Akyuz M, Gunduz B, Irgi E, et al. Validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of Spinal Cord Independence Measure-III. Spinal Cord 2015; 53(6): 455-60.
14. Ackerman P, Morrison SA, McDowell S, Vazquez L. Using the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III to measure functional recovery in a post-acute spinal cord injury program. J Spinal Cord Med 2010; 48: 380-7.