Ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury using walking aids generally do not report better long-term outcomes than wheelchair users: results from the InSCI-NL survey.

OBJECTIVE

Greater mobility independence after spinal cord injury is thought to lead to better long-term outcomes. However, evidence is inconclusive for ambulation compared with wheelchair dependency. This study aimed to describe and compare long-term outcomes across mobility levels in individuals with spinal cord injury.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SUBJECTS: Community-dwelling individuals with spinal cord injury in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Data were collected via the Dutch arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (InSCI-NL) Survey (2018). Mobility level was assessed using the modified Spinal Cord Independence Measure-Self-Report. Long-term outcomes were compared across mobility levels, using generalised linear models.

RESULTS

253 participants were included with a mean (standard deviation) age of 58.7 (13.6) years and median [interquartile range] time since injury of 10 [5.0-22.0] years. Electric wheelchair users reported lower functional independence, and more participation problems and secondary health conditions compared with manual wheelchair users (p < 0.001). Ambulatory individuals using walking aids reported no better outcomes than manual wheelchair users, except for functional independence (p < 0.001). Ambulatory individuals without walking aids reported more paid work than those with walking aids (62.7% vs 34.3%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In general, electric wheelchair users reported the least favourable long-term outcomes. Remarkably, ambulatory individuals using walking aids generally did not report better outcomes than manual wheelchair users.