COMPARING THE VALIDITY OF FIVE PARTICIPATION INSTRUMENTS IN PERSONS WITH SPINAL CONDITIONS

Objective: To evaluate and compare the construct validity of 5 participation instruments developed using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Methods: A total of 545 subjects diagnosed and treated for a spinal condition at an acute hospital were followed-up and consented to complete a questionnaire. Subjects completed 5 participation instruments (Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA), Keele Assessment of Participation (KAP), Participation Measure-Post Acute Care (PM-PAC), Participation Objective Participation Subjective (POPS), World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II)). In addition, each subject completed a health status instrument and a quality of life instrument. The dimensionality, convergent/discriminant validity and known-group validity of the participation instruments were assessed. Results: A confirmatory factor analysis of the facture structure for the IPA and PM-PAC demonstrated adequate model fit. For convergent/discriminant validity, correlations were generally higher among similar domains of the WHODAS II, IPA, KAP and PM-PAC, and as expected the lowest correlations were observed with the objective domains of the POPS. Most instruments demonstrated known-group validity. Conclusion: Differences in the construct validity evidence of the POPS compared with the other 4 instruments were noted. To date, there is no gold standard for measuring participation, and clinicians and researchers should consider the type of information required prior to selecting an instrument

Sacral Fractures and Associated Injuries.

STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to describe the injuries associated with sacral fractures and to analyze their impact on patient outcome. METHODS: A comprehensive narrative review of the literature was performed to identify the injuries associated with sacral fractures. RESULTS: Sacral fractures are uncommon injuries that result from high-energy trauma, and that, due to their rarity, are frequently underdiagnosed and mistreated. Only 5% of sacral fractures occur in isolation. Injuries most often associated with sacral fractures include neurologic injuries (present in up to 50% of sacral fractures), pelvic ring disruptions, hip and lumbar spine fractures, active pelvic/ abdominal bleeding and the presence of an open fracture or significant soft tissue injury. Diagnosis of pelvic ring fractures and fractures extending to the lumbar spine are key factors for the appropriate management of sacral fractures. Importantly, associated systemic (cranial, thoracic, and abdominopelvic) or musculoskeletal injuries should be promptly assessed and addressed. These associated injuries often dictate the management and eventual outcome of sacral fractures and, therefore, any treatment algorithm should take them into consideration. CONCLUSIONS: Sacral fractures are complex in nature and often associated with other often-missed injuries. This review summarizes the most relevant associated injuries in sacral fractures and discusses on their appropriate management

The Development of a Universally Accepted Sacral Fracture Classification: A Survey of AOSpine and AOTrauma Members.

Study Design Survey study. Objective To determine the global perspective on controversial aspects of sacral fracture classifications. Methods While developing the AOSpine Sacral Injury Classification System, a survey was sent to all members of AOSpine and AOTrauma. The survey asked four yes-or-no questions to help determine the best way to handle controversial aspects of sacral fractures in future classifications. Chi-square tests were initially used to compare surgeons\u27 answers to the four key questions of the survey, and then the data was modeled through multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 474 surgeons answered all questions in the survey. Overall 86.9% of respondents felt that the proposed hierarchical nature of injuries was appropriate, and 77.8% of respondents agreed that that the risk of neurologic injury is highest in a vertical fracture through the foramen. Almost 80% of respondents felt that the separation of injuries based on the integrity of L5-S1 facet was appropriate, and 83.8% of surgeons agreed that a nondisplaced sacral U fracture is a clinically relevant entity. Conclusion This study determines the global perspective on controversial areas in the injury patterns of sacral fractures and demonstrates that the development of a comprehensive and universally accepted sacral classification is possible

AOSpine—Spine Trauma Classification System: The Value of Modifiers: A Narrative Review With Commentary on Evolving Descriptive Principles

Study Design: Narrative review. Objectives: To describe the current AOSpine Trauma Classification system for spinal trauma and highlight the value of patient-specific modifiers for facilitating communication and nuances in treatment. Methods: The classification for spine trauma previously developed by The AOSpine Knowledge Forum is reviewed and the importance of case modifiers in this system is discussed. Results: A successful classification system facilitates communication and agreement between physicians while also determining injury severity and provides guidance on prognosis and treatment. As each injury may be unique among different patients, the importance of considering patient-specific characteristics is highlighted in this review. In the current AOSpine Trauma Classification, the spinal column is divided into 4 regions: the upper cervical spine (C0-C2), subaxial cervical spine (C3-C7), thoracolumbar spine (T1-L5), and the sacral spine (S1-S5, including coccyx). Each region is classified according to a hierarchical system with increasing levels of injury or instability and represents the morphology of the injury, neurologic status, and clinical modifiers. Specifically, these clinical modifiers are denoted starting with M followed by a number. They describe unique conditions that may change treatment approach such as the presence of significant soft tissue damage, uncertainty about posterior tension band injury, or the presence of a critical disc herniation in a cervical bilateral facet dislocation. These characteristics are described in detail for each spinal region. Conclusions: Patient-specific modifiers in the AOSpine Trauma Classification highlight unique clinical characteristics for each injury and facilitate communication and treatment between surgeons

Pattern of neurological recovery in persons with an acute cervical spinal cord injury over the first 14 days post injury

IntroductionFollowing a traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) it is critical to document the level and severity of injury. Neurological recovery occurs dynamically after injury and a baseline neurological exam offers a snapshot of the patient's impairment at that time. Understanding when this exam occurs in the recovery process is crucial for discussing prognosis and acute clinical trial enrollment. The objectives of this study were to: (1) describe the trajectory of motor recovery in persons with acute cervical SCI in the first 14 days post-injury; and (2) evaluate if the timing of the baseline neurological assessment in the first 14 days impacts the amount of motor recovery observed.MethodsData were obtained from the Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry (RHSCIR) site in Vancouver and additional neurological data was extracted from medical charts. Participants with a cervical injury (C1–T1) who had a minimum of three exams (including a baseline and discharge exam) were included. Data on the upper-extremity motor score (UEMS), total motor score (TMS) and American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) were included. A linear mixed-effect model with additional variables (AIS, level of injury, UEMS, time, time2, and TMS) was used to explore the pattern and amount of motor recovery over time.ResultsTrajectories of motor recovery in the first 14 days post-injury showed significant improvements in both TMS and UEMS for participants with AIS B, C, and D injuries, but was not different for high (C1–4) vs. low (C5–T1) cervical injuries or AIS A injuries. The timing of the baseline neurological examination significantly impacted the amount of motor recovery in participants with AIS B, C, and D injuries.DiscussionTiming of baseline neurological exams was significantly associated with the amount of motor recovery in cervical AIS B, C, and D injuries. Studies examining changes in neurological recovery should consider stratifying by severity and timing of the baseline exam to reduce bias amongst study cohorts. Future studies should validate these estimates for cervical AIS B, C, and D injuries to see if they can serve as an “adjustment factor” to control for differences in the timing of the baseline neurological exam

Evolution of the AO Spine Sacral and Pelvic Classification System: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to describe the genesis of the AO Spine Sacral and Pelvic Classification System in the context of historical sacral and pelvic grading systems. METHODS A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases was performed consistent with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify all existing sacral and pelvic fracture classification systems. RESULTS A total of 49 articles were included in this review, comprising 23 pelvic classification systems and 17 sacral grading schemes. The AO Spine Sacral and Pelvic Classification System represents both the evolutionary product of these historical systems and a reinvention of classic concepts in 5 ways. First, the classification introduces fracture types in a graduated order of biomechanical stability while also taking into consideration the neurological status of patients. Second, the traditional belief that Denis central zone III fractures have the highest rate of neurological deficit is not supported because this subgroup often includes a broad spectrum of injuries ranging from a benign sagittally oriented undisplaced fracture to an unstable "U-type" fracture. Third, the 1990 Isler lumbosacral system is adopted in its original format to divide injuries based on their likelihood of affecting posterior pelvic or spinopelvic stability. Fourth, new discrete fracture subtypes are introduced and the importance of bilateral injuries is acknowledged. Last, this is the first integrated sacral and pelvic classification to date. CONCLUSIONS The AO Spine Sacral and Pelvic Classification is a universally applicable system that redefines and reorders historical fracture morphologies into a rational hierarchy. This is the first classification to simultaneously address the biomechanical stability of the posterior pelvic complex and spinopelvic stability, while also taking into consideration neurological status. Further high-quality controlled trials are required prior to the inclusion of this novel classification within a validated scoring system to guide the management of sacral and pelvic injuries

Differential Histopathological and Behavioral Outcomes Eight Weeks after Rat Spinal Cord Injury by Contusion, Dislocation, and Distraction Mechanisms

The objective of this study was to compare the long-term histological and behavioral outcomes after spinal cord injury (SCI) induced by one of three distinct biomechanical mechanisms: dislocation, contusion, and distraction. Thirty male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomized to incur a traumatic cervical SCI by one of these three clinically relevant mechanisms. The injured cervical spines were surgically stabilized, and motor function was assessed for the following 8 weeks. The spinal cords were then harvested for histologic analysis. Quantification of white matter sparing using Luxol fast blue staining revealed that dislocation injury caused the greatest overall loss of white matter, both laterally and along the rostrocaudal axis of the injured cord. Distraction caused enlarged extracellular spaces and structural alteration in the white matter but spared the most myelinated axons overall. Contusion caused the most severe loss of myelinated axons in the dorsal white matter. Immunohistochemistry for the neuronal marker NeuN combined with Fluoro Nissl revealed that the dislocation mechanism resulted in the greatest neuronal cell losses in both the ventral and dorsal horns. After the distraction injury mechanism, animals displayed no recovery of grip strength over time, in contrast to the animals subjected to contusion or dislocation injuries. After the dislocation injury mechanism, animals displayed no improvement in the grooming test, in contrast to the animals subjected to contusion or distraction injuries. These data indicate that different SCI mechanisms result in distinct patterns of histopathology and behavioral recovery. Understanding this heterogeneity may be important for the future development of therapeutic interventions that target specific neuropathology after SCI

Establishing the Injury Severity of Subaxial Cervical Spine Trauma: Validating the Hierarchical Nature of the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System.

STUDY DESIGN Global cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE To validate the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification by examining the perceived injury severity by surgeon across AO geographical regions and practice experience. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Previous subaxial cervical spine injury classifications have been limited by subpar interobserver reliability and clinical applicability. In an attempt to create a universally validated scheme with prognostic value, AO Spine established a subaxial cervical spine injury classification involving four elements: (1) injury morphology, (2) facet injury involvement, (3) neurologic status, and (4) case-specific modifiers. METHODS A survey was sent to 272 AO Spine members across all geographic regions and with a variety of practice experience. Respondents graded the severity of each variable of the classification system on a scale from zero (low severity) to 100 (high severity). Primary outcome was to assess differences in perceived injury severity for each injury type over geographic regions and level of practice experience. RESULTS A total of 189 responses were received. Overall, the classification system exhibited a hierarchical progression in subtype injury severity scores. Only three subtypes showed a significant difference in injury severity score among geographic regions: F3 (floating lateral mass fracture, p:0.04), N3 (incomplete spinal cord injury, p:0.03), and M2 (critical disk herniation, p:0.04). When stratified by surgeon experience, pairwise comparison showed only 2 morphological subtypes, B1 (bony posterior tension band injury, p:0.02) and F2 (unstable facet fracture, p:0.03), and one neurologic subtype (N3, p:0.02) exhibited a significant difference in injury severity score. CONCLUSIONS The AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System has shown to be reliable and suitable for proper patient management. The study shows this classification is substantially generalizable by geographic region and surgeon experience; and provides a consistent method of communication among physicians while covering the majority of subaxial cervical spine traumatic injuries.Level of Evidence: 4

Surgical Decision Making for Unstable Thoracolumbar Spine Injuries: Results of a Consensus Panel Review by the Spine Trauma Study Group

Objectives: The optimal surgical approach and treatment of unstable thoracolumbar spine injuries are poorly defined owing to a lack of widely accepted level I clinical literature. This lack of evidence based standards has led to varied practice patterns based on individual surgeon preferences. The purpose of this study was to survey the leaders in the field of spine trauma to define the major characteristics of thoracolumbar injuries that influence their surgical decision making. In the absence of good scientific data, expert consensus opinions may provide surgeons with a practical framework to guide therapy and to conduct future research. Methods: A panel of 22 leading spinal surgeons from 20 level I trauma centers in seven countries met to discuss the indications for surgical approach selection in unstable thoracolumbar injuries. Injuries were presented to the surgeons in a case scenario survey format. Preferred surgical approaches to the clinical scenarios were tabulated and comments weighed. Results: All members of the panel agreed that three independent characteristics of thoracolumbar injuries carry primary importance in surgical decision making: the injury morphology, the neurologic status of the patient, and the integrity of the posterior ligaments. Six clinical scenarios based on the neurologic status of the patient (intact, incomplete, or complete) and on the status of the posterior ligamentous complex (intact or disrupted) were created, and consensus treatment approaches were described. Additional circumstances capable of altering the treatments were acknowledged. Conclusions: Decision making for the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar injuries is largely dependent on three patient characteristics: injury morphology, neurologic status, and posterior ligament integrity. A logical and practical decision-making process based on these characteristics may guide treatment even for the most complicated fracture patterns

The Sub-axial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System (SLIC): A Novel Approach to Recognize The Importance of Morphology, Neurology and Integrity of the Disco-ligamentous complex

Abstract Background Context Despite technological advances in spine surgery, classification of sub-axial cervical spine injuries remains largely descriptive, lacking standardization and any relationship to prognosis or clinical decision making. Purpose The primary purpose of this paper is to define a classification system for sub-axial cervical spine trauma that conveys information about injury pattern and severity as well as treatment considerations and prognosis. The proposed system is designed to be both comprehensive and easy to use. The secondary objective is to evaluate the classification system in the basic principles of classification construction, namely reliability and validity. Study Design/Setting Derivation of the classification was from a synthesis of the best cervical classification parameters gleaned from an exhaustive literature review and expert opinion of experienced spine surgeons. Multi-center reliability and validity study of a cervical classification system using previously collected CT, MRI, and plain film x-ray images of sub-axial cervical trauma. Methods Important clinical and radiographic variables encountered in sub-axial cervical trauma were identified by a working section of the Spine Trauma Study Group (STSG). Significant limitations of existing injury classification systems were defined and addressed within the new system. It was then introduced to the STSG and applied to 11 cervical trauma cases selected to represent a spectrum of subaxial injury. Six weeks later, the cases were randomly re-ordered and again scored using the novel classification system. Twenty surgeons completed both intervals. Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability and several forms of validity were assessed. For comparison, the reliability of both the Harris and the Ferguson & Allen systems were also evaluated. Results Each of three main categories (injury morphology; disco-ligamentous complex integrity; and neurological status) identified as integrally important to injury description, treatment, and prognosis was assigned an ordinal score range, weighted according to its perceived contribution to overall injury severity. A composite injury severity score was modeled by summing the scores from all three categories. Treatment options were assigned based upon threshold values of the severity score. Inter-rater agreement as assessed by ICC of the DLC, Morphology, and Neurological Status scores was 0.49, 0.57, and 0.87, respectively. Intra-rater agreement as assessed by ICC of the DLC, Morphology, and Neurological Status scores was 0.66, 0.75, and 0.90, respectively. Raters agreed with treatment recommendations of the algorithm in 93.3 % of cases, suggesting high construct validity. The reliability if the SLIC treatment algorithm compared favorably to the earlier classification systems of Harris and Ferguson & Allen. Conclusions The Sub-axial Injury Classification (SLIC) and Severity Scale provides a comprehensive classification system for sub-axial cervical trauma, incorporating pertinent characteristics for generating prognoses and courses of management. Early data on validity and reliability are encouraging. Further testing is necessary before introducing the SLIC score into clinical practice