Diagnostic criteria of traumatic central cord syndrome. Part 2: a questionnaire survey among spine specialists.
Аннотация
STUDY
DESIGN
A questionnaire survey.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the need for the introduction of quantitative diagnostic criteria for the traumatic central cord syndrome (TCCS).
SETTING
An online questionnaire survey with participants from all over the world.
METHODS
An invitation to participate in an eight-item online survey questionnaire was sent to surgeon members of AOSpine International.
RESULTS
Out of 3340 invited professionals, 157 surgeons (5%) from 41 countries completed the survey. Whereas most of the respondents (75%) described greater impairment of the upper extremities than of the lower extremities in their own TCCS definitions, symptoms such as sensory deficit (39%) and bladder dysfunctions (24%) were reported less frequently. Initially, any difference in motor strength between the upper and lower extremities was considered most frequently (23%) as a 'disproportionate' difference in power. However, after presenting literature review findings, the majority of surgeons (61%) considered a proposed difference of at least 10 points of power (based on the Medical Research Council scale) in favor of the lower extremities as an acceptable cutoff criterion for a diagnosis of TCCS. Most of the participants (40%) felt that applying a single criterion to the diagnosis of TCCS is insufficient for research purposes.
CONCLUSION
Various definitions of TCCS were used by physicians involved in the spinal trauma care. The authors consider a difference of at least 10 motor score points between upper and lower extremity power a clear diagnostic criterion. For clinical research purposes, this diagnostic criterion can be considered as a face valid addendum to the commonly applied TCCS definition as introduced by Schneider et al.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.