Tag Archives: SCI

Rehab Journal Review: October 2014

Archives of PMR, October 2014

1810 Does home therapy with telerehabilitation improve shoulder pain related symptoms in wheelchair users with SCI? Do NOT read this paper to know the answer because they’ve done only a ‘before-after’ study, from which nothing useful can be inferred. Such (and many) interventions need an RCT design to prove usefulness. Should a placebo controlled RCT be done for Ebola vaccine too, in these crisis times? Yes but No. If keen to know how, read this

1838 Can MRI findings in acute brain injury predict which patients would later progress to a level of high functional walking? “No” was the inference from this longitudinal followup study of 65 persons with brain injury in Norway.

1903 I’m not a fan of using questionnaires as key outcome measures in clinical conditions. And I’m glad with the findings of this Spanish study. The authors evaluated whether questionnaires filled by persons with fibromyalgia to report their activity levels corroborated with actual activity recorded on the accelerometer carried by them for a week. “The (questionnaires) and the accelerometer differ greatly when assessing physical activity… Therefore, the self-administered (questionnaires) show questionable usefulness…to assess physical activity in fibromyalgia.”

 

Experitemental Eye Research, November 2014
Never believe a health news from any non-scientific media, my resolve is stronger now. “Viagra linked to blindness” cried out a prominently placed Google news item. Along with a tell-tale photo of a man who is apparently blind.
Since we routinely prescribe Sildenafil in SCI rehabilitation, I was intrigued and chased the link to the source journal article.
1. It was a report of an animal study,not humans.
2. Rats with mutations in Retinitis Pigmentosa gene,when given Sildenafil, showed reversible impairments in electroretinograms. They didn’t become blind.

Lesson: Never believe a health news from any non-scientific media.

 

Cell transplantation, October 2014

Lots of noise made by a BBC feature about a research that claims near miraculous improvement in one patient with spinal cord injury after receiving olfactory ensheathing cells treatment. The cells were taken directory from the olfactory bulb in the brain (contrast from cells derived from the nose reported in previous studies) and supplemented with a nerve graft across the injured spinal cord. Points to note: authors themselves indicate this is just a proof of concept study, and say “The results …are very encouraging, but have to be
confirmed in a larger group of patients…”. Lesson: Promising- yes. Euphoria- no. Let’s wait.

If in doubt, please read the original article (not media reports) Functional regeneration of supraspinal connections in a patient with transected spinal cord following transplantation of bulbar olfactory ensheathing cells with peripheral nerve bridging. It’s open access.

Practice tidbits

Are heparin-flushes worth the money? Cochrane review December 2013: “We found no conclusive evidence of important differences when heparin intermittent flushing was compared with 0.9% normal saline flushing for central venous catheter maintenance in terms of efficacy or safety. As heparin is more expensive than normal saline, our findings challenge its continued use in CVC flushing outside the context of clinical trials.”

Are electrical modalities useful in shoulder  adhesive capsulitis? Cochrane Review May 2014: Low level laser has low level evidence that it could reduce pain for upto 1 month and improve functions for upto 4 months. No other modality has any reliable evidence.

If you’re having removal of lower wisdom tooth, should you take paracetamol or Ibuprofen for pain relief? Cochrane Review December 2013:  “There is high quality evidence that ibuprofen is superior to paracetamol at doses of 200 mg to 512mg…The novel combination drug is showing encouraging results when compared to the single drugs.”

***

Liked on twitter: “Integrity in research is like virginity- you can only lose it once” (Source: Twitter)

Tagged , , ,

Rehab Journal Review: August 2014

Spinal Cord, August 2014

629  Clinical researchers in general share a belief of being the torchbearers of the spirit of scientific enquiry. At times, this leads to a tendency to get so consumed with Mission Science that we miss the woods for the trees. And end up being just a pain in the a**e (literally, in this instance). That’ s the feeling I got reading this paper on Melatonin supplementation for sleep disturbance following cervical spinal cord injury. The following parameters were being studied during polysomnography (PSG) using contraptions attached to the patients as they tried to sleep in spite of the researchers’ best efforts- “central electroencephalography, bilateral electro-oculography, electromyography (chin, diaphragmatic), electrocardiography, blood oxygen saturation, nasal pressure, leg movements, body position and respiratory movements (chest and abdomen)”. And then the big OMG parameter “A rectal thermoresistor-measured core body temperature during the PSG.” I had visions of Guantanamo Bay. That’s where it snaps. I understand the logic, best objective outcomes and all that. But, I do not agree to the design where sleep quality is studied by torturing people with wires head to toes, in addition to shoving a piece of instrument up their bottoms. Not all that is technically possible is necessary, or humanly desirable. I know my opinions don’t count, but doesn’t it make better sense to first make it conducive for people to sleep by taking off all the wires, and then use just a self-reported sleep quality outcome tool? What matters more than subjective judgments for sleep quality? Ironically, all the objective recordings notwithstanding, the authors conclude “Melatonin improved subjective sleep with participants reporting faster sleep initiation, having longer sleep duration and improved psychological well-being”. Does melatonin work better in subcontinental conditions in a better designed study? Potential PG thesis topic.

646 For those who hold a generalized prejudice about women in Islamic countries, time to wake up. This month, Maryam Mirzakhani, a Persian mathematician working in the US, became the first ever female winner of the prestigious Field’s medal, the highest prize in Mathematics. And then, this study on Sexual dysfunction in women with SCI- a study from Iran. The results of this descriptive study are similar to those from other parts of the world, that women with SCI do have significant dysfunction in multiple aspects of their sexual functioning. What might be surprising to many, though, was the statement “Of 118 eligible patients with SCI, 13 (11%) declined to participate because of discomfort over answering questions about sexual functioning”. I see only the positive side that almost 90% of women interviewed were willing answer, which seems an at/above par score for any country. The authors have tried to explain the 11% non-response as follows  “(this)  reflects the highly personal and private nature of sexual activity in Iran.”  Dear authors, your choice of words is funny, and strongly suggestive of a prejudiced view about sexual practices in the rest of the world. Please be assured that except perhaps at carnivals such as Mardi Gras and in certain types of private parties, sexual activity is still personal and private in many parts of the world, not just in Iran.

S24 I’m surprised Spinal Cord chose to publish a single case report of USG guided phenol block of obturator nerve for adductor spasticity. Did we miss out on reporting the scores of guided blocks that have become part of our routine practice?

S27 For the past many years, we have been using a Ferticare vibrator in the management of anejaculation following SCI. Placement of the diaphragm is usually over the frenulum or the dorsum. This case series promotes a new type of penile vibrator, whose name would not look out of place in the marvel universe. The fork shape of the Viberect-X3 appears to provide added zing by simultaneously stimulating the frenulum and the dorsum . I’m not sure if the claimed advantage of sandwiching is really significant, since the reported success rates of 77% do not seem to add much to what is already possible. Moreover, unlike the Ferticare product, amplitude and frequency in this new product seem to be non-adjustible.

 

Archives of PMR, August 2014

1585 Plantar fasciitis is one of those conditions which could be as troublesome to the treating team as to the patients. In some, everything could fail to achieve symptom relief- medications, footwear modifications, injections, surgery. This systematic review on utility of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in plantar fasciitis has reported its surprisingly positive findings in Cochrane-like tables and illustrations. “…efficacy of low-intensity ESWT is worthy of recognition. The short-term pain relief and functional outcomes of this treatment are satisfactory”- a tall claim. If true, we should start using ECSW. But, apart from the odd title of the article that makes no grammatical sense to me in spite of repeated reading, there are other glaring errors, either in the published illustrations or in my understanding. Competition alert! Those who point out either or both correctly would receive a personalized gift.

 

JAMA, August 2014

799 One of the most significant impacts of technology on us over the past couple of decades has been the decentralization and simplification of key processes on a mass scale. Carry a phone anywhere, print a document at home, get cash anytime from ATMs without going to banks during workhours, book Indian train ticket from anywhere, share with friends personal status updates  in a few seconds from anywhere including space. None of this was commonplace 20 years ago.  ‘Power to the patients’ is a logical extension of such technological advancements. This UK study on “Effect of Self-monitoring and Medication Self-titration on Systolic Blood Pressure in Hypertensive Patients” spectacularly concludes “self-monitoring with self-titration of antihypertensive medication compared with usual care resulted in lower systolic blood pressure at 12 months”. Self titration resulted in a systolic BP that was lesser by almost 10mmHg. I am among those who believe routine blood pressure monitoring at the population level should be delinked from clinics and hospitals, provided we have the right type of evidence. In addition to monitoring, delinking titration of medication too is one step ahead. This changes nothing as yet, with just the surrogate outcome measurement of BP recording at 1 year reported in this study. Long term followup to evaluate benefits/harms in terms of change (or the lack of it) in morbidity and mortality trends, could give us the correct picture.

 

In spite of examples such as a placebo controlled trial in management of cardiac arrest,  I realized from a few reactions that clinical equipoise and the ethics of placebo controls have not been understood and/or accepted by a few of you. I would keep repeating until somebody shoots me. When there exists a true uncertainty about benefits or harms from an intervention, it IS ethical to study it irrespective of whether it is the standard of care or not. Any intervention that does not have conclusive, cumulative scientific evidence in its favor can be contested by a placebo in a properly designed trial. Dr.Trisha Greenhalgh, best-selling author and academician, has a way of explaining things. I’ve expanded on it.  “If you have a cardiac arrest, you may get a ‘totally useless placebo’ – or ‘a totally useless (and potentially harmful) adrenaline shot’. We do not know for sure the benefits or harms of either intervention. If the situation arises, would you help us find the truth by participating in this study? The results of the study could lead to millions of people worldwide avoiding ineffective intervention in future”.

***

I’d be attending the Cochrane Colloquium 20-27 September 2014. A week full of discussions on different aspects of pragmatic evidence informed healthcare; could be toxic.

And very good at double-checking.

source: Buzzfeed

 

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Rehab Journal Review: July 2014

Journal of Neurosurgery, July 2014

‘A nose could grow in your back’, the creepy and till-recently unsubstantiated salvo that was used to deter people from falling prey to unscrupulous ‘stem cell treatments’ has become almost true. This is the first report of such an “occurrence of a spinal cord mass after olfactory mucosal cell transplantation in a patient with a spinal cord injury.” The tumor was excised, and its biopsy revealed “respiratory epithelium with underlying submucosal glands identical to that seen in normal nasal mucosa.” The lesson: please, let’s wait. Until “better understanding of how to control cell proliferation, survival, migration, and differentiation in the pathological environment to foresee or prevent uncontrolled or abnormal cell growth in human patients.” Thanks Prashanth, for sending the links.

Archives of PMR, July 2014

1289 South Indian film industry is turning back time. Once again, there are talented female actors who can sing well as well as they can act and dance. The recent hit Fy-Fy-Fy sung by actor Ramya Nambeesan is an example. Why did I go off-track? Because of this similar rhyming functional independence tool from the US for spinal cord injury, the SCI-Fi short form, which is claimed to have good good internal consistency, and minimal ceiling and floor effects. We could have a look at this, but we’ve just transitioned to SCIM-II.

Spinal Cord, July 2014

511 This review on use of catheters for clean intermittent catheterization raises more questions than providing answers. Should off-label reuse be encouraged? If yes, how frequently should the catheters be changed? How should they be cleaned/sterilized before each use? How should they be stored? Are hydrophilic self-lubricating catheters better than uncoated tubes for off-label use? What is the overall health economic benefit/liability of each option? It is a shame that in spite of the blanket encouragement for off-label re-use in our practice for more than 3 decades, we don’t have have answers to these questions, and continue based only on ‘belief’. Worse,  “off-label reuse is not supported by legal requirements in Europe or the United States, or in Australia or Canada”. Hunting for post-graduate thesis topics? Do consider these very relevant questions that need answers.

547 One more answer that is long pending: is pharmacological prophylaxis for thromboembolism necessary for everyone with acute spinal cord injury? Do benefits outweigh risks and costs? As I’d mentioned in an earlier post, in spite of the existence of this clinical equipoise, a study proposal from my colleagues was (wrongly) shot down by our institutional review board, judging that a placebo arm is unethical. Dr HS Chhabra has apparently had no such troubles in getting approval for this RCT comparing LMWH Vs ‘No treatment’ in acute SCI. There was no difference between the two arms in the incidence of symptomatic DVT or complications, though the control arm had more asymptomatic DVT, which is of uncertain clinical significance. Hmm… one more clinically relevant thesis topic, awaiting a samaritan.

Lancet, 24 July 2014

Online “Elementary” Holmes would have remarked if he’d read this article. The RCT, comparing paracetamol Vs placebo for low back pain, is an example for how a seemingly simple study could get primetime spotlight if 1) there is real clinical relevance (I’m itching to use that ‘equipoise’ word again) 2) the publisher or the author has  good media relations. Should we continue to use paracetamol? Of course, yes, because it is at least “as good as placebo“.

BMJ, July 2014

Is Dabigatran really that good? Surprise (er…should we really be?)! One more instance of a drug company that has suppressed trial data to improve income. Internal documents accessed through a lawsuit found that “Optimally used (=titrated) dabigatran has the potential to provide patients an even better efficacy and safety profile than fixed dose dabigatran and also a better safety and efficacy profile than a matched warfarin group”. But, “Boehringer Ingelheim, the maker of dabigatran, has failed to share with regulators information about the potential benefits of monitoring anticoagulant activity”, in order not to dilute the marketing USP- ‘use without testing INR’. Lesson for our practice: Do use Dabigatran, but with INR checks to titrate dose for better effectiveness and to reduce bleeding risks.

Practice tid-bits

***

Liked on twitter:

doughnut diet

Tagged , , , , , ,