Retrospective audit.
The objective of this study was to identify the proportion of patients with cervical spinal cord injury who would potentially benefit from nerve transfer surgery to gain active hand opening, and to determine when a safe nerve transfer decision can be made.
Christchurch, New Zealand.
Case note review of the first 12 months following acute cervical spinal cord injury (2007-2012). Neurological assessment at 6 weeks, 12 weeks and 1 year following injury.
Fifty-three patients had complete assessments and showed changes in the level of injury and severity of neurological injury between assessments. Forty-two percent of patients had motor complete C5-7 level injuries 12 weeks following injury and would benefit from consideration for nerve transfer to improve hand opening. Fewer (26%) would benefit 1 year following injury owing to a change in the neurological level of injury.
Twelve-week neurological assessment identifies patients who may benefit from nerve transfer surgery. This enables referral for comprehensive upper limb assessment and reassessment of motor function to determine suitability for surgical intervention. Nerve transfer within the window of opportunity provides active hand opening for patients following cervical spinal cord injury.Spinal Cord advance online publication, 27 September 2016; doi:10.1038/sc.2016.128.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 September 2016.
All research outputs
#2,953,119
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Spinal Cord
#191
of 2,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,486
of 322,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Spinal Cord
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,336 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,819 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
