Objectives: To evaluate sex-related differences of spinal cord lesion patients.
Patients: Two hundred and eighty-one patients were included with evaluation of: lesion to admission time, aetiology, lesion level, associated injury, medical complications and surgical intervention, length of stay, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment and motor scores.
Main outcome measures: ASIA impairment grade and ASIA motor scores; Barthel Index, Rivermead Mobility Index and Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury.
Results: In the entire group female patients had a lower frequency of traumatic lesions, a lower frequency of complications at admission and a higher frequency of incomplete lesions (ASIA impairment C). In the matching cohorts comparison female patients showed the same neurological and functional recovery as male patients.
Conclusion: Gender does not seems to influence spinal cord rehabilitation outcomes despite the fact that men and women showed significant epidemiological differences. Further studies are needed to evaluate some aspects such as long-term bladder management and complications.
References
1.
1 Cifu DX, Seel RT, Kreutzer JS, McKinley WO. A multicenter investigation in lengths of stay, hospitalization charges, and outcomes for a matched tetraplegia sample. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1999; 80: 733-740.
2.
2 McKinley WO, Seel RT, Gadi RK, Tewksbury MA. Nontraumatic vs. traumatic spinal cord injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2001; 80: 693-699.
3.
3 Consortium for Spinal Cord Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines. Outcomes following traumatic spinal cord injury: clinical practice guidelines for health-care professionals. Washington; Paralyzed Veterans of America, 1999.
4.
4 Sumida M, Fujimoto M, Tokuhiro A, Tominaga T, Magara A, Uchida R. Early rehabilitation effect for traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2001; 82: 391-395.
5.
5 Greenwald BD, Seel RT, Cifu DX, Shah AN. Gender-related differences in acute rehabilitation length of stay, charges and functional outcomes for a matched sample with spinal cord injury: a multicenter investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2001; 82: 1181-1187.
6.
6 Maynard FM, Bracken MB, Creasey G et al. International standards for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury patients (revised). Spinal Cord1997; 35: 266-274.
7.
7 Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J1965; 14: 61-65.
8.
8 Collen FM, Wade DT, Robb GF, Bradshaw CM. The Rivermead Mobility Index: a further development of the Rivermead Motor Assessment. Int Disabil Stud1991; 13: 50-54.
9.
9 Ditunno JF, Ditunno PL, Graziani V et al. Walking index for spinal cord injury (WISCI): an international multicenter validity and reliability study. Spinal Cord2000; 38: 234-243.
10.
10 Krause JS, Kemp B, Coker J. Depression after spinal cord injury: relation to gender, ethnicity, aging and socioeconomic indicators. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2000; 81: 1099-1109.
11.
11 Krause JS, Sternberg M, Maides J, Lottes S. Employment after spinal cord injury: differences related to geographic region, gender and race. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1998; 79: 615-624.
12.
12 DeVivo MJ, Hawkins LN, Richards JS, Go BK. Outcomes of post-spinal cord injury marriages. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1995; 76: 130-138.
13.
13 Shakelford M, Farley T, Vines CL. A comparison of women and men with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord1998; 36: 337-339.
14.
14 Jackson AB, DeVivo MJ. Urologic long-term follow-up in women with spinal cord injuries. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1992; 73: 1029-1035.
15.
15 McKinley WO, Seel RT, Hardman JT. Nontraumatic spinal cord injury: incidence, epidemiology and functional outcome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1999; 619-623.
16.
16 Chen Y, DeVivo MJ, Lloyd LK. Bladder stone incidence in persons with spinal cord injury: determinants and trends. Urology2001; 58: 665-670.
