Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008;31(2):133-44.
doi: 10.1080/10790268.2008.11760704.

Functional recovery measures for spinal cord injury: an evidence-based review for clinical practice and research

Affiliations

Functional recovery measures for spinal cord injury: an evidence-based review for clinical practice and research

Kim Anderson et al. J Spinal Cord Med. 2008.

Abstract

Background/objective: The end goal of clinical care and clinical research involving spinal cord injury (SCI) is to improve the overall ability of persons living with SCI to function on a daily basis. Neurologic recovery does not always translate into functional recovery. Thus, sensitive outcome measures designed to assess functional status relevant to SCI are important to develop.

Method: Evaluation of currently available SCI functional outcome measures by a multinational work group.

Results: The 4 measures that fit the prespecified inclusion criteria were the Modified Barthel Index (MBI), the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), the Quadriplegia Index of Function (QIF), and the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM). The MBI and the QIF were found to have minimal evidence for validity, whereas the FIM and the SCIM were found to be reliable and valid. The MBI has little clinical utility for use in the SCI population. Likewise, the FIM applies mainly when measuring burden of care, which is not necessarily a reflection of functional recovery. The QIF is useful for measuring functional recovery but only in a subpopulation of people with SCI, and substantial validity data are still required. The SCIM is the only functional recovery outcome measure designed specifically for SCI.

Conclusions: The multinational work group recommends that the latest version of the SCIM (SCIM III) continue to be refined and validated and subsequently implemented worldwide as the primary functional recovery outcome measure for SCI. The QIF may continue to be developed and validated for use as a supplemental tool for the nonambulatory tetraplegic population.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The views expressed in this article are the result of independent research and do not necessarily represent the views of the US Department of Education. The SCI Measures Meeting was supported by grant funds from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services in the US Department of Education.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Maynard FM, Jr, Bracken MB, Creasey G, et al. International Standards for Neurological and Functional Classification of Spinal Cord Injury. American Spinal Injury Association. Spinal Cord. 1997;35:266–274. - PubMed
    1. Blight AR, Tuszynski MH. Clinical trials in spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma. 2006;23:586–593. - PubMed
    1. Johnston MV, Graves D. Towards guidelines for evaluation of measures: an introduction with application to spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2008;31:13–26. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42:703–709. - PubMed
    1. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61–65. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms