Evidence Hub

Self-catheterization acquisition after hand reanimation protocols in C5-C7 tetraplegic patients

Bernuz B, Guinet A, Rech C, Hugeron C, Even-Schneider A, Denys P, Barbot F, Chartier-Kastler E et al.

Spinal cord, 2011

152 participants

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Case series from a prospectively acquired database and phone survey.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of upper limb reanimation (ULR) protocols on acquisition of intermittent self-catheterization (ISC) in C5-C7 ASIA tetraplegic patients.

SETTING: University Hospital, Paris, France.

METHODS: A prospectively acquired database of 152 tetraplegic patients followed in ULR consultation between 1997 and 2008 in a rehabilitation unit was studied. A total of 20 patients met the inclusion criteria, which mainly were traumatic C5-C7 tetraplegic adult patients who were unable to perform ISC, and who benefited from ULR with the objectives of improving hand abilities and of ISC acquisition, through urethral orifice for males or via a continent urinary stoma for females. The main outcome measure was ISC acquisition (ISC+) proportion. Population characteristics and secondary outcome measures: ISC+/ISC- patients were compared regarding epidemiological and surgical data, key-grip strength, patient global improvement score, activities of daily living and quality of life (PGI-I, Wuolle questionnaire, verbal rating scale).

RESULTS: ISC+ was 75%. It depended on key-grip strength (P<0.05) and led to a statistically significant improvement of urinary status compared with ISC- patients (P<0.01). ULR improved patients' abilities and QoL in both ISC+ and ISC- patients.

CONCLUSION: ULR protocols allow ISC in most C5-C7 tetraplegic patients. Multidisciplinary care with surgeons and PRM…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 152 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free