↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring Upper Limb Recovery after Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: Insights beyond Assessment Scores

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Monitoring Upper Limb Recovery after Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: Insights beyond Assessment Scores
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2016.00142
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Brogioli, Sophie Schneider, Werner L. Popp, Urs Albisser, Anne K. Brust, Inge-Marie Velstra, Roger Gassert, Armin Curt, Michelle L. Starkey

Abstract

Preclinical investigations in animal models demonstrate that enhanced upper limb (UL) activity during rehabilitation promotes motor recovery following spinal cord injury (SCI). Despite this, following SCI in humans, no commonly applied training protocols exist, and therefore, activity-based rehabilitative therapies (ABRT) vary in frequency, duration, and intensity. Quantification of UL recovery is limited to subjective questionnaires or scattered measures of muscle function and movement tasks. To objectively measure changes in UL activity during acute SCI rehabilitation and to assess the value of wearable sensors as novel measurement tools that are complimentary to standard clinical assessments tools. The overall amount of UL activity and kinematics of wheeling were measured longitudinally with wearable sensors in 12 thoracic and 19 cervical acute SCI patients (complete and incomplete). The measurements were performed for up to seven consecutive days, and simultaneously, SCI-specific assessments were made during rehabilitation sessions 1, 3, and 6 months after injury. Changes in UL activity and function over time were analyzed using linear mixed models. During acute rehabilitation, the overall amount of UL activity and the active distance wheeled significantly increased in tetraplegic patients, but remained constant in paraplegic patients. The same tendency was shown in clinical scores with the exception of those for independence, which showed improvements at the beginning of the rehabilitation period, even in paraplegic subjects. In the later stages of acute rehabilitation, the quantity of UL activity in tetraplegic individuals matched that of their paraplegic counterparts, despite their greater motor impairments. Both subject groups showed higher UL activity during therapy time compared to the time outside of therapy time. Tracking day-to-day UL activity is necessary to gain insights into the real impact of a patient's impairments on their UL movements during therapy and during their leisure time. In the future, this novel methodology may be used to reliably control and adjust ABRT and to evaluate the progress of UL rehabilitation in clinical trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 92 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 14%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 31 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 14 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Neuroscience 9 10%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 33 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 31 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,338,537
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,818
of 11,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,482
of 337,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#47
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 337,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.