Relationships between body composition, anthropometrics, and standard lipid panels in a normative population.

Introduction: More than one third of adults in the United States (US) meet the clinical criteria for a diagnosis of metabolic syndrome, but often diagnosis is challenging due to healthcare access, costs and discomfort with the process and invasiveness associated with a standard medical examination. Less invasive and more accessible approaches to collecting biometric data may have utility in identifying individuals at risk of diagnoses, such as metabolic syndrome or dyslipidemia diagnoses. Body composition is one such source of biometric data that can be non-invasively acquired in a home or community setting that may provide insight into an individual's propensity for a metabolic syndrome diagnosis. Here we investigate possible associations between body composition, anthropometrics and lipid panels in a normative population. Methods: Healthy participants visited the Lab100 clinic location at a hospital setting in New York City and engaged in a wellness visit led by a nurse practitioner. Blood was analyzed at point-of-care using the Abbott Piccolo Xpress portable diagnostic analyzer (Abbott Laboratories, IL, USA) and produced direct measures of total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein (HDL-C), low density lipoprotein (LDL-C), very-low density lipoprotein (VLDL-C), and triglycerides (TG). Body composition and anthropometric data were collected using two separate pieces of equipment during the same visit (Fit3D and InBody570). Regression analysis was performed to evaluate associations between all variables, after adjusting for age, sex, race, AUDIT-C total score (alcohol use), and current smoking status. Results: Data from 199 participants were included in the analysis. After adjusting for variables, percentage body fat (%BF) and visceral fat levels were significantly associated with every laboratory lipid value, while waist-to-hip ratio also showed some significant associations. The strongest associations were detected between %BF and VLDL-C cholesterol levels (t = 4.53, p = 0.0001) and Triglyceride levels (t = 4.51, p = 0.0001). Discussion: This initial, exploratory analysis shows early feasibility in using body composition and anthropometric data, that can easily be acquired in community settings, to identify people with dyslipidemia in a normative population.

Health impacts reported in the Spinal Cord Injury COVID-19 Pandemic Experience Survey (SCI-CPES).

CONTEXT: In people with spinal cord injury (SCI), infections are a leading cause of death, and there is a high prevalence of diabetes mellitus, obesity, and hypertension, which are all comorbidities associated with worse outcomes after COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVE: To characterize self-reported health impacts of COVID-19 on people with SCI related to exposure to virus, diagnosis, symptoms, complications of infection, and vaccination. METHODS: The Spinal Cord Injury COVID-19 Pandemic Experience Survey (SCI-CPES) study was administered to ask people with SCI about their health and other experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: 223 community-living people with SCI (male = 71%; age = 52±15 years [mean±SD]; paraplegia = 55%) completed the SCI-CPES. Comorbidities first identified in the general population as associated with poor outcomes after COVID-19 infection were commonly reported in this SCI sample: hypertension (30%) and diabetes (13%). 23.5% of respondents reported a known infection exposure from someone who visited (13.5%) or lived in their home (10%). During the study, which included a timeframe when testing was either unavailable or scarce, 61% of respondents were tested for COVID-19; 14% tested or were presumed positive. Fever, fatigue, and chills were the most common symptoms reported. Of the 152 respondents surveyed after COVID-19 vaccines became available, 82% reported being vaccinated. Race and age were significantly associated with positive vaccination status: most (78%) individuals who were vaccinated identified as Non-Hispanic White and were older than those who reported being unvaccinated (57±14 vs. 43±13 years, mean±SD). CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported COVID-19 symptoms were relatively uncommon and not severe in this sample of people with SCI. Potential confounders and limitations include responder, recruitment and self-reporting biases and changing pandemic conditions. Future studies on this topic should query social distancing and other behavioral strategies. Large retrospective chart review studies may provide additional data on incidence and prevalence of COVID-19 infections, symptoms, and severities in the SCI population.

Development of the Spinal Cord Injury COVID-19 Pandemic Experience Survey (SCI-CPES).

CONTEXT: Early during the COVID-19 pandemic, rehabilitation providers received reports from people with spinal cord injury (SCI) of considerable disruptions in caregiver services, medical and nursing care, and access to equipment and supplies; concomitantly, the medical community raised concerns related to the elevated risk of acquiring the infection due to SCI-specific medical conditions. Due to the novel nature of the pandemic, few tools existed to systematically investigate the outcomes and needs of people with SCI during this emergency. OBJECTIVE: To develop a multidimensional assessment tool for surveying the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and psychological health, employment, caregiving services, medical supplies and equipment, and the delivery of medical care for people with SCI. METHODS: The Spinal Cord Injury COVID-19 Pandemic Experience Survey (SCI-CPES) study, conducted between July 2020 through August 2021, surveyed people with SCI about their experiences during the early COVID-19 pandemic. The SCI-CPES was developed by a SCI care and research consortium using an iterative process. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-three people completed the survey. Most respondents resided in the consortium catchment area. As the survey progressed, online informed consent became available allowing dissemination of the SCI-CPES nationally. CONCLUSIONS: The consortium rapidly implemented the capture of experiences with COVID-19 pandemic directly from people with SCI, including survey creation, institutional approvals, distribution, online e-consenting, and data collection. In the future, the SCI-CPES is adaptable for use in other types of emergencies and disasters.

Treatments perceived to be helpful for neuropathic pain after traumatic spinal cord injury: A multicenter cross-sectional survey study.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the perceived helpfulness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions and their combinations for neuropathic pain (NeuP) and subcategories of NeuP after spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: Six Spinal Cord Injury Model System Centers. METHODS: Three hundred ninety one individuals at least one year post traumatic SCI were enrolled. A telephone survey was conducted to determine the pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments used in the last 12 months for each participant's three worst pains, whether these treatments were "helpful", and if currently used, each treatments' effectiveness. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty participants (56%) reported 354 distinct NeuPs. Pharmacological treatments rated helpful for NeuP were non-tramadol opioids (opioids were helpful for 86% of opioid treated NeuPs), cannabinoids (83%), and anti-epileptics (79%). Non-pharmacological treatments rated helpful for NeuP were massage (76%), body position adjustment (74%), and relaxation therapy (70%). Those who used both opioids and exercise reported greater NeuP treatment helpfulness compared to participants using opioids without exercise (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Opioids, cannabinoids, and massage were reported more commonly as helpful than treatments recommended as first-line therapies by current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for NeuP after SCI (antiepileptics and antidepressants). Individuals with SCI likely value the modulating effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments on the affective components of pain in addition to the sensory components of pain when appraising treatment helpfulness.

Treatments that are perceived to be helpful for non-neuropathic pain after traumatic spinal cord injury: a multicenter cross-sectional survey.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to identify the treatments that people with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) used for their non-neuropathic pains (nonNeuPs) and how they subjectively rated the helpfulness of those treatments. SETTING: Six centers from the Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems. METHODS: Three hundred ninety one individuals who were at least 1-year post-traumatic SCI were enrolled. A telephone survey was conducted for pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments utilized in the last 12 months for each participant's three worst pains and the perceived helpfulness of each treatment for each pain. RESULTS: One hundred ninety (49%) participants reported at least one nonNeuP (Spinal Cord Injury Pain Instrument score < 2) in the previous 7 days. NSAIDs/aspirin, acetaminophen, opioids, and cannabinoids were the most commonly used and helpful pharmacologic treatments for overall nonNeuP locations (helpful in 77-89% of treated pains). Body position adjustment, passive exercise, massage, resistive exercise, and heat therapy were reported as the most commonly used non-pharmacological treatments for nonNeuPs. Heat therapy, aerobic exercise, massage, and body position adjustment were the most helpful non-pharmacological treatments for overall nonNeuP locations (helpful in 71-80% of treated pains). Perceived helpfulness of treatments varied by pain locations, which may be due to different mechanisms underlying pains in different locations. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the study may help guide clinicians in selecting pain-specific treatments for nonNeuPs. The self-reported helpfulness of heat therapy, exercise, and massage suggests a possible direction for clinical trials investigating these treatments of nonNeuP while limiting the side effects accompanying pharmacologic treatments.

Exoskeletal-Assisted Walking During Acute Inpatient Rehabilitation Leads to Motor and Functional Improvement in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the potential effects of incorporating exoskeletal-assisted walking (EAW) into spinal cord injury (SCI) acute inpatient rehabilitation (AIR) on facilitating functional and motor recovery when compared with standard of care AIR. DESIGN: A quasi-experimental design with a prospective intervention group (AIR with EAW) and a retrospective control group (AIR only). SETTING: SCI AIR facility. PARTICIPANTS: Ten acute inpatient participants with SCI who were eligible for locomotor training were recruited in the intervention group. Twenty inpatients with SCI were identified as matched controls by reviewing an AIR database, Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation, by an individual blinded to the study. Both groups (N=30) were matched based on etiology, paraplegia/tetraplegia, completeness of injury, age, and sex. INTERVENTION: EAW incorporated into SCI AIR. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: FIM score, International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury Upper Extremity Motor Score and Lower Extremity Motor Scores (LEMS), and EAW session results, including adverse events, walking time, and steps. RESULTS: Changes from admission to discharge LEMS and FIM scores were significantly greater in the intervention group (LEMS change: 14.3±10.1; FIM change: 37.8±10.8) compared with the control group (LEMS change: 4.6±6.1; FIM change: 26.5±14.3; Mann-Whitney U tests: LEMS, P<.01 and FIM, P<.05). One adverse event (minor skin abrasion) occurred during 42 walking sessions. Participants on average achieved 31.5 minutes of up time and 18.2 minutes of walk time with 456 steps in one EAW session. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of EAW into standard of care AIR is possible. AIR with incorporated EAW has the potential to facilitate functional and motor recovery compared with AIR without EAW.

Safety and feasibility of exoskeleton-assisted walking during acute/sub-acute SCI in an inpatient rehabilitation facility: A single-group preliminary study.

Context/objective: Information on the safety and feasibility of lower extremity powered exoskeletons for persons with acute/sub-acute spinal cord injury (SCI) is limited. Understanding the safety and feasibility of employing powered exoskeletons in acute/sub-acute (<6 months post injury) at a SCI acute inpatient rehabilitation (SCI-AIR) facility could guide clinical practice and provide a basis for larger clinical trials on efficacy and effectiveness. Design: Single group observational study. Setting: SCI-AIR. Participants: Participants (n = 12; age: 28-71 years; 58% AIS D; 58% male) with neurological levels of injuries ranging from C2 to L3. Interventions: Up to 90 min of exoskeleton-assisted locomotor training was provided up to three times per week during SCI-AIR. Outcome measures: Safety of device use during inpatient locomotor training was quantified as the number of adverse events (AE) per device exposure hour. Feasibility of device use was defined in terms of protocol compliance, intensity, and proficiency. Results: Concerning safety, symptomatic hypotension was the most common AE reported at 111-events/exoskeleton-hours. Protocol compliance had a mean (SD) of 54% (30%). For intensity, 77% of participants incorporated variable assistance into at least 1 walking session; 70% of participants' sessions were completed with a higher RPE than the physical therapist. In proficiency, 58% achieved at least minimal assistance when walking with the device. Conclusion: Exoskeleton training in SCI-AIR can be safe and feasible for newly injured individuals with SCI who have clinically defined ambulatory goals. Nonetheless, sufficient controls to minimize risks for AEs, such as hypotensive events, are required.

An interview based approach to the anorectal portion of the International Standards of Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury Exam (I-A-ISNCSCI): a pilot study.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-blinded study. OBJECTIVE: To design and evaluate the use of an interview based version of the anorectal portion of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) exam in the acute inpatient rehabilitation (AIR) setting. SETTING: AIR unit. METHODS: Participants admitted to AIR underwent standard ISNCSCI exams (S-ISNCSCI) as part of routine inpatient care within 3 days of being administered an interview version of the anorectal portion of the ISNCSCI (I-A-ISNCSCI). Agreement between the anorectal portion of the S-ISNCSCI (S-A-ISNCSCI) and the I-A-ISNCSCI was evaluated. RESULTS: Forty of forty-five enrolled participants completed the assessments. Agreement between the I-A-ISNCSCI and S-A-ISNCSCI was substantial for anorectal sensation to light touch (k = 0.71, 95% CI 0.52-0.90, N = 36), pin prick (k = 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.87, N = 38), deep anal pressure (k = 0.77, 95% CI 0.53-1.00, N = 37), and completeness of injury based on combined sacral sensory criteria (k = 0.72, 95% CI 0.47-0.97, N = 40); and fair for voluntary anal contraction (k = 0.29, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.59, N = 36). Responses of "I don't know" were excluded from agreement analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study was a first step in developing interview based tools such as the I-A-ISNCSCI in an AIR setting providing convenient access to individuals with SCI and their direct feedback. The study design introduces potential recall bias and may not match true clinical situations such as remote follow-up of neurological changes for chronic patients. The use of interview based tools for assessing individuals with SCI remains worthy of further study.

Pulse article: opioid prescription for pain after spinal cord damage (SCD), differences from recommended guidelines, and a proposed algorithm for the use of opioids for pain after SCD.

Study design: Online questionnaire of spinal cord injury (SCI) physicians. Objectives: The objective of this study is to characterize the approach to opioid prescription for persons with spinal cord damage (SCD). Setting: An international online questionnaire. Methods: A survey was posted online and circulated among international societies within the field of SCI medicine from August to November 2018. Results: One hundred and twenty-three physicians responded to the survey. Of these, 107 (92%) managed pain for persons with SCD. Most (82%) felt that opioid prescription was appropriate for uncontrolled acute pain, but fewer (67%) felt it was appropriate for chronic pain. Of those who felt opioids had a role in the treatment of neuropathic pain, 46% did not think there should be a specific upper limit of opioid dose. The majority (85%) would continue prescribing high doses (250 morphine milligram equivalent (MME) doses/day) if that dose were effective. Tramadol was the most common opioid prescribed first line. Conclusion: Most physicians who responded to this survey prescribe opioids for intractable pain after SCD. A significant proportion of respondents believed that there should not be a specific upper limit of opioid dose prescribed if the drug is tolerated; this does not align with current recommendations. Most physicians do not feel influenced in their prescribing habits by regulatory bodies. If physicians decide to taper an opioid that is being tolerated well, it is most commonly related to a fear of the patient developing an opioid-use disorder. The authors propose an algorithm that may help align practice patterns with current recommended practice guidelines.

Robotic Rehabilitation and Spinal Cord Injury: a Narrative Review.

Mobility after spinal cord injury (SCI) is among the top goals of recovery and improvement in quality of life. Those with tetraplegia rank hand function as the most important area of recovery in their lives, and those with paraplegia, walking. Without hand function, emphasis in rehabilitation is placed on accessing one's environment through technology. However, there is still much reliance on caretakers for many activities of daily living. For those with paraplegia, if incomplete, orthoses exist to augment walking function, but they require a significant amount of baseline strength and significant energy expenditure to use. Options for those with motor complete paraplegia have traditionally been limited to the wheelchair. While wheelchairs provide a modified level of independence, wheelchair users continue to face difficulties in access and mobility. In the past decade, research in SCI rehabilitation has expanded to include external motorized or robotic devices that initiate or augment movement. These robotic devices are used with 2 goals: to enhance recovery through repetitive, functional movement and increased neural plasticity and to act as a mobility aid beyond orthoses and wheelchairs. In addition, lower extremity exoskeletons have been shown to provide benefits to the secondary medical conditions after SCI such as pain, spasticity, decreased bone density, and neurogenic bowel. In this review, we discuss advances in robot-guided rehabilitation after SCI for the upper and lower extremities, as well as potential adjuncts to robotics.

Feasibility and Safety of a Powered Exoskeleton for Assisted Walking for Persons With Multiple Sclerosis: A Single-Group Preliminary Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the feasibility, safety, and secondary benefit potential of exoskeleton-assisted walking with one device for persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). DESIGN: Single-group longitudinal preliminary study with 8-week baseline, 8-week intervention, and 4-week follow-up. SETTING: Outpatient MS clinic, tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=13; age range, 38-62y) were mostly women with Expanded Disability Status Scale scores ranging from 5.5 to 7.0. INTERVENTION: Exoskeleton-assisted walk training. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were accessibility (enrollment/screen pass), tolerability (completion/dropout), learnability (time to event for standing, walking, and sitting with little or no assistance), acceptability (satisfaction on the device subscale of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology version 2), and safety (event rates standardized to person-time exposure in the powered exoskeleton). Secondary outcomes were walking without the device (timed 25-foot walk test and 6-minute walk test distance), spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale), and health-related quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement and Information System pain interference and Quality of Life in Neurological Conditions fatigue, sleep disturbance, depression, and positive affect and well-being). RESULTS: The device was accessible to 11 and tolerated by 5 participants. Learnability was moderate, with 5 to 15 sessions required to walk with minimal assistance. Safety was good; the highest adverse event rate was for skin issues at 151 per 1000 hours' exposure. Acceptability ranged from not very satisfied to very satisfied. Participants who walked routinely improved qualitatively on sitting, standing, or walking posture. Two participants improved and 2 worsened on ≥1 quality of life domain. The pattern of spasticity scores may indicate potential benefit. CONCLUSIONS: The device appeared feasible and safe for about a third of our sample, for whom routine exoskeleton-assisted walking may offer secondary benefits.