OBJECTIVE: Predicting neurological recovery following traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) is a complex task considering the heterogeneous nature of injury and the inconsistency of individual studies. This study aims to summarize the current evidence on neurological recovery following TSCI by use of a meta-analytical approach, and to identify injury, treatment, and study variables with prognostic significance.METHODS: A literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed, and studies reporting follow-up changes in American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) or Frankel or ASIA motor score (AMS) scales were included in the meta-analysis. The proportion of patients with at least 1 grade of AIS/Frankel improvement, and point changes in AMS were calculated using random pooled effect analysis. The potential effect of severity, level and mechanism of injury, type of treatment, time and country of study, and follow-up duration were evaluated using meta-regression analysis.RESULTS: A total of 114 studies were included, reporting AIS/Frankel changes in 19,913 patients and AMS changes in 6920 patients. Overall, the quality of evidence was poor. The AIS/Frankel conversion rate was 19.3% (95% CI 16.2–22.6) for patients with grade A, 73.8% (95% CI 69.0–78.4) for those with grade B, 87.3% (95% CI 77.9–94.8) for those with grade C, and 46.5% (95% CI 38.2–54.9) for those with grade D. Neurological recovery was significantly different between all grades of SCI severity in the following order: C > B > D > A. Level of injury was a significant predictor of recovery; recovery rates followed this pattern: lumbar > cervical and thoracolumbar > thoracic. Thoracic SCI and penetrating SCI were significantly more likely to result in complete injury. Penetrating TSCI had a significantly lower recovery rate compared to blunt injury (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62–0.92; p = 0.006). Recovery rate was positively correlated with longer follow-up duration (p = 0.001). Studies with follow-up durations of approximately 6 months or less reported significantly lower recovery rates for incomplete SCI compared to studies with long-term (3–5 years) follow-ups.CONCLUSIONS: The authors’ meta-analysis provides an overall quantitative description of neurological outcomes associated with TSCI. Moreover, they demonstrated how neurological recovery after TSCI is significantly dependent on injury factors (i.e., severity, level, and mechanism of injury), but is not associated with type of treatment or country of origin. Based on these results, a minimum follow-up of 12 months is recommended for TSCI studies that include patients with neurologically incomplete injury.

Background/Aims: To describe the epidemiology of spinal cord injury (SCI) in the developing world. Methods: Developing countries were selected based on the definition proposed by the International Monetary Fund. A literature search was performed in July 2012 in Medline and Embase. Further article procurement was obtained via the reference lists of the identified articles, websites, and direct contact with the authors of the identified studies. We designed search strategies using the key words: SCI, epidemiology, incidence, and prevalence. According to the inclusion criteria, 64 studies from 28 countries were included. Results: The incidence of SCI in developing countries is 25.5/million/year (95% CI: 21.7-29.4/million/year) and ranges from 2.1 to 130.7/million/year. Males comprised 82.8% (95% CI: 80.3-85.2) of all SCIs with a mean age of 32.4 years (95% CI: 29.7-35.2). The two leading causes of SCI were found to be motor vehicle crashes (41.4%; 95% CI: 35.4-47.4) and falls (34.9%; 95% CI: 26.7-43.1). Complete SCIs were found to be more common than incomplete injuries (complete SCI: 56.5%; 95% CI: 47.6-65.3; incomplete SCI: 43.0%; 95% CI: 34.1-52.0). Similarly, paraplegia was found to be more common than tetraplegia (paraplegia: 58.7%; 95% CI: 51.5-66.0; tetraplegia: 40.6%; 95% CI: 33.3-48.0). Conclusion: Through an understanding of the epidemiology of SCI in developing countries, appropriate preventative strategies and resource allocation may decrease the incidence and improve the care of these injuries.

Rasouli MR, et al. Asian Spine J. 2012 Dec;6(4):294-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.4184/asj.2012.6.4.294

Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: Providing a comprehensive review of spinal cord injury cost of illness studies to assist health-service planning. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature published from Jan. 1990 to Nov. 2020 via Pubmed, EMBASE, and NHS Economic Evaluation Database. Our primary outcomes were overall direct health care costs of SCI during acute care, inpatient rehabilitation, within the first year post-injury, and in the ensuing years. Results: Through a 2-phase screening process by independent reviewers, 30 articles out of 6177 identified citations were included. Cost of care varied widely with the mean cost of acute care ranging from $290 to $612,590; inpatient rehabilitation from $19,360 to $443,040; the first year after injury from $32,240 to $1,156,400; and the ensuing years from $4,490 to $251,450. Variations in reported costs were primarily due to neurological level of injury, study location, methodological heterogeneities, cost definitions, study populations, and timeframes. A cervical level of the injury, ASIA grade A and B, concomitant injuries, and in-hospital complications were associated with the greatest incremental effect in cost burden. Conclusion: The economic burden of SCI is generally high and cost figures are broadly higher for developed countries. As studies were only available in few countries, the generalizability of the cost estimates to a regional or global level is only limited to countries with similar economic status and health systems. Further investigations with standardized methodologies are required to fill the knowledge gaps in the healthcare economics of SCI.