Dataset Information

How individuals with spinal cord injury in the United States access and assess information about experimental therapies and clinical trials: results of a clinical survey.

ABSTRACT:

Study design

An internet-based survey.

Objectives

To determine how individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) access information about experimental therapies and clinical trials. To understand which factors influence receipt of and perceived trustworthiness of that information.

Setting

Two academic medical centers and an SCI organization.

Methods

Demographic information frequencies and percentages were calculated then analyzed using chi-square tests for independence. Fisher's exact test of independence was used to assess significance for contingency tables with categories containing expected counts below five.

Results

Three hundred sixty four persons with SCI participated in the survey. Most felt confident in their ability to evaluate SCI-specific information from a variety of sources, though SCI organizations and the medical literature were deemed the most reliable. Information from SCI specialists was deemed more credible than that from non-SCI specialists, but only 53.6% of participants had access to them. Nearly all (89.0%) respondents who had sought information about experimental therapies had found it online, while 51.4% of those who had participated in a clinical trial had been contacted by a research team. Only 8.4% of participants felt their medical teams offered them sufficient information about experimental therapies and clinical trials. Wealthier and more educated respondents were more knowledgeable about health-related resources on the internet. Nearly all participants (96.9%) expressed interest in learning more about trials related to SCI.

Conclusions

There is an information deficit among people with SCI pertaining to experimental therapies and clinical trials. It is exacerbated by lack of income, education, and access to SCI specialists.

SUBMITTER: Farrehi C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7684288 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:More than 1 million people in the United States live with a spinal cord injury (SCI). Despite medical advances, many patients with SCIs still experience substantial neurological disability, with loss of motor, sensory, and autonomic function. Cell therapy is ideally suited to address the multifactorial nature of the secondary events following SCI. Remarkable advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of SCI, structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging, image-guided micro-neurosurgical techniques, and transplantable cell biology have enabled the use of cell-based regenerative techniques in the clinic. It is important to note that there are more than a dozen recently completed, ongoing, or recruiting cell therapy clinical trials for SCI that reflect the views of many key stakeholders. The field of regenerative neuroscience has reached a stage in which the clinical trials are scientifically and ethically justified. Although experimental models and analysis methods and techniques continue to evolve, no model will completely replicate the human condition. It is recognized that more work with cervical models of contusive/compressive SCI are required in parallel with clinical trials. It is also important that the clinical translation of advances made through well-established and validated experimental approaches in animal models move forward to meet the compelling needs of individuals with SCI and to advance the field of regenerative neuroscience. However, it is imperative that such efforts at translation be done in the most rigorous and informed fashion to determine safety and possible efficacy, and to provide key information to clinicians and basic scientists, which will allow improvements in regenerative techniques and the validation and refinement of existing preclinical animal models and research approaches. The field of regenerative neuroscience should not be stalled at the animal model stage, but instead the clinical trials need to be focused, safe, and ethical, backed up by a robust, translationally relevant preclinical research strategy.

Project description:BackgroundThe epidemiological international landscape of traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) has evolved over the last decades along with given inherent differences in acute care and rehabilitation across countries and jurisdictions. However, to what extent these differences may influence neurological and functional recovery as well as the integrity of international trials is unclear. The latter also relates to historical clinical data that are exploited to inform clinical trial design and as potential comparative data.MethodsEpidemiological and clinical data of individuals with traumatic and ischemic SCI enrolled in the European Multi-Center Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) were analyzed. Mixed-effect models were employed to account for the longitudinal nature of the data, efficiently handle missing data, and adjust for covariates. The primary outcomes comprised demographics/injury characteristics and standard scores to quantify neurological (i.e., motor and sensory scores examined according to the International Standards for the Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury) and functional recovery (walking function). We externally validated our findings leveraging data from a completed North American landmark clinical trial.ResultsA total of 4601 patients with acute SCI were included. Over the course of 20 years, the ratio of male to female patients remained stable at 3:1, while the distribution of age at injury significantly shifted from unimodal (2001/02) to bimodal distribution (2019). The proportional distribution of injury severities and levels remained stable with the largest percentages of motor complete injuries. Both, the rate and pattern of neurological and functional recovery, remained unchanged throughout the surveillance period despite the increasing age at injury. The findings related to recovery profiles were confirmed by an external validation cohort (n=791). Lastly, we built an open-access and online surveillance platform ("Neurosurveillance") to interactively exploit the study results and beyond.ConclusionsDespite some epidemiological changes and considerable advances in clinical management and rehabilitation, the neurological and functional recovery following SCI has remained stable over the last two decades. Our study, including a newly created open-access and online surveillance tool, constitutes an unparalleled resource to inform clinical practice and implementation of forthcoming clinical trials targeting neural repair and plasticity in acute spinal cord injury.

Project description:BackgroundTranscutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a non-invasive modality in which electrodes can stimulate spinal circuitries and facilitate a motor response. This review aimed to evaluate the methodology of studies using tSCS to generate motor activity in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) and to appraise the quality of included trials.MethodsA systematic search for studies published until May 2021 was made of the following databases: EMBASE, Medline (Ovid) and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the quality of included trials. The electrical characteristics of stimulation were summarised to allow for comparison across studies. In addition, the surface electromyography (EMG) recording methods were evaluated.ResultsA total of 3753 articles were initially screened, of which 25 met the criteria for inclusion. Studies were divided into those using tSCS for neurophysiological investigations of reflex responses (n = 9) and therapeutic investigations of motor recovery (n = 16). The overall quality of evidence was deemed to be poor-to-fair (10.5 ± 4.9) based on the Downs and Black Quality Checklist criteria. The electrical characteristics were collated to establish the dosage range across stimulation trials. The methods employed by included studies relating to stimulation parameters and outcome measurement varied extensively, although some trends are beginning to appear in relation to electrode configuration and EMG outcomes.ConclusionThis review outlines the parameters currently employed for tSCS of the cervicothoracic and thoracolumbar regions to produce motor responses. However, to establish standardised procedures for neurophysiological assessments and therapeutic investigations of tSCS, further high-quality investigations are required, ideally utilizing consistent electrophysiological recording methods, and reporting common characteristics of the electrical stimulation administered.