The evolution of walking-related outcomes over the first 12 weeks of rehabilitation for incomplete traumatic spinal cord injury: the multicenter randomized Spinal Cord Injury Locomotor Trial

B Dobkin, H Barbeau, D Deforge, J Ditunno, R Elashoff, D Apple, M Basso, A Behrman, S Harkema, M Saulino, M Scott, Spinal Cord Injury Locomotor Trial Group, B Dobkin, H Barbeau, D Deforge, J Ditunno, R Elashoff, D Apple, M Basso, A Behrman, S Harkema, M Saulino, M Scott, Spinal Cord Injury Locomotor Trial Group

Abstract

Background: The Spinal Cord Injury Locomotor Trial (SCILT) compared 12 weeks of step training with body weight support on a treadmill (BWSTT) that included overground practice to a defined but more conventional overground mobility intervention (CONT) in patients with incomplete traumatic SCI within 8 weeks of onset. No previous studies have reported walking-related outcomes during rehabilitation.

Methods: This single-blinded, randomized trial entered 107 American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) C and D patients and 38 ASIA B patients with lesions between C5 and L3 who were unable to walk on admission for rehabilitation. The Functional Independence Measure (FIM-L) for walking, 15-m walking speed, and lower extremity motor score (LEMS) were collected every 2 weeks.

Results: No significant differences were found at entry and during the treatment phase (12-week mean FIM-L = 5, velocity = 0.8 m/s, LEMS = 35, distance walked in 6 min = 250 m). Combining the 2 arms, a FIM-L >or= 4 was achieved in < 10% of ASIA B patients, 92% of ASIA C patients, and all of ASIA D patients. Walking speed of >or= 0.6 m/s correlated with a LEMS near 40 or higher.

Conclusions: Few ASIA B and most ASIA C and D patients achieved functional walking ability by the end of 12 weeks of BWSTT and CONT, consistent with the primary outcome data at 6 months. Walking-related measures assessed at 2-week intervals reveal that time after SCI is an important variable for entering patients into a trial with mobility outcomes. By about 6 weeks after entry, most patients who will recover have improved their FIM-L to >3 and are improving in walking speed. Future trials may reduce the number needed to treat by entering patients with FIM-L < 4 at > 8 weeks after onset if still graded ASIA B and at > 12 weeks if still ASIA C.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Changes in the (A) Functional Independence Measure–Locomotor (FIM-L) score, (B) walking speed, and (C) lower extremity motor score (LEMS) measured biweekly over 12 weeks of either body weight–supported treadmill training or the control mobility training for ASIA B patients. The number of patients is found in Table 1. Poor outcomes were found for both treatment groups in the trial. The vertical bars represent the standard error. TX = treatment group; BWSTT = body weight–supported treadmill training.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Changes in the (A) Functional Independence Measure–Locomotor (FIM-L) score, (B) walking speed, and (C) lower extremity motor score (LEMS) measured biweekly over 12 weeks of either body weight–supported treadmill training or the control mobility training for American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) C and D patients. The number of patients is found in Table 2. The vertical bars represent the standard error. TX = treatment group; BWSTT = body weight–supported treadmill training.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Piecewise regression analysis of walking speed in relation to the lower extremity motor score (LEMS) at the end of training reveals that a slow but functional walking speed of 0.60 m/s tended to be reached as the LEMS approached 40 and then increased to more functional velocities as the LEMS exceeded 40.

References

    1. Dobkin B. The Clinical Science of Neurologic Rehabilitation. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.
    1. Barbeau H, McCrea D, O’Donovan M, et al. Tapping into spinal circuits to restore motor function. Brain Res Rev. 1999;30:27–51.
    1. de Leon R, Hodgson J, Roy R, et al. Locomotor capacity attributable to step training versus spontaneous recovery after spinalization in adult cats. J Neurophysiol. 1998;79:1329–1340.
    1. Barbeau H, Nadeau S, Garneau C. Physical determinants, emerging concepts and training approaches in gait of individuals with spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma. 2006;23:571–585.
    1. Dobkin B. Overview of treadmill locomotor training with partial body weight support: a neurophysiologically sound approach whose time has come for randomized clinical trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 1999;13:157–165.
    1. Wernig A, Muller S, Nanassy A, et al. Laufband therapy based on “Rules of Spinal Locomotion” is effective in spinal cord injured persons. Euro J Neurosci. 1995;7:823–829.
    1. Dobkin B, Harkema S, Requejo P, et al. Modulation of locomotor-like EMG activity in subjects with complete and incomplete chronic spinal cord injury. J Neurol Rehabil. 1995;9:183–190.
    1. Dietz V, Wirz M, Curt A, et al. Locomotor patterns in paraplegic patients: training effects and recovery of spinal cord function. Spinal Cord. 1998;36:380–390.
    1. Harkema S, Hurley S, Patel U, et al. Human lumbosacral spinal cord interprets loading during stepping. J Neurophysiol. 1997;77:797–811.
    1. Nymark J, DeForge D, Barbeau H, et al. Body weight support treadmill gait training in the subacute recovery phase of incomplete spinal cord injury. J Neuro Rehabil. 1998;12:119–138.
    1. Dietz V, Duysens J. Significance of load receptor input during locomotion: a review. Posture Gait. 2000;11:102–110.
    1. Dobkin B, Apple D, Barbeau H, et al. Methods for a randomized trial of weight-supported treadmill training versus conventional training for walking during inpatient rehabilitation after incomplete traumatic spinal cord injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003;17:153–167.
    1. Dobkin BH, Apple D, Barbeau H, et al. Weight-supported treadmill vs over-ground training for walking after acute incomplete SCI. Neurology. 2006;66:484–493.
    1. Dobkin BH. Short-distance walking speed and timed walking distance: redundant measures for clinical trials? Neurology. 2006;66:584–586.
    1. Pohl P, Perera S, Duncan P, et al. Gains in distance walking in a 3-month follow-up poststroke: what changes? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2004;18:30–36.
    1. Burns S, Golding D, Rolle W, et al. Recovery of ambulation in motor-incomplete tetraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:1169–1172.
    1. Geisler F, Coleman W, Grieco G, et al. Measurements and recovery patterns in a multicenter study of acute spinal cord injury. Spine. 2001;26:S68–S86.
    1. Waters R, Adkins R, Yakura J, Sie I. Motor and sensory recovery following incomplete paraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:67–72.
    1. Waters R, Adkins R, Yakura J, Sie I. Motor and sensory recovery following incomplete tetraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:306–311.
    1. Dobkin B, Havton L. Basic advances and new avenues in therapy of spinal cord injury. Annu Rev Med. 2004;55:255–282.
    1. Dobkin BH, Curt A, Guest J. Cellular transplants in China: observational study from the largest human experiment in chronic spinal cord injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2006;20(1):5–13.
    1. Marino R, Ditunno J, Donovan W, et al. Neurologic recovery after traumatic spinal cord injury: data from the model spinal cord injury systems. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80:1391–1396.
    1. Dobkin BH. Rehabilitation and functional neuroimaging dose-response trajectories for clinical trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005;19:276–282.
    1. Vaynman S, Gomez-Pinilla F. License to run: exercise impacts functional plasticity in the intact and injured CNS by using neurotrophins. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005;19:283–295.
    1. Waters R, Adkins R, Yakura J, et al. Prediction of ambulatory performance based on motor scores derived from standards of the American Spinal Injury Association. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:756–760.
    1. Kirshblum SC, O’Connor KC. Predicting neurologic recovery in traumatic cervical spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79:1456–1466.
    1. Geisler F, Coleman W, Grieco G, et al. The Sygen multicenter acute spinal cord injury study. Spine. 2001;26:S87–S98.
    1. Steeves J, Lammertse D, Curt A, et al. Guidelines for the conduct of clinical trials for spinal cord injury as developed by the ICCP panel. Spine. 2006 in press.
    1. Barbeau H. Locomotor training in neurorehabilitation: emerging rehabilitation concepts. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003;17:3–11.
    1. Steeves JD, Fawcett J, Tuszynski M. Report of international clinical trials workshop on spinal cord injury, February 2004. Spinal Cord. 2004;42:591–597.
    1. Winchester P, McColl R, Querry R, et al. Changes in supraspinal activation patterns following robotic locomotor therapy in motor-incomplete spinal cord injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005;19:313–324.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다