MP07-14 VALIDATION OF UPPER EXTREMITY MOTOR FUNCTION AS A KEY PREDICTOR OF BLADDER MANAGEMENT FOLLOWING SPINAL CORD INJURY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction/Female Pelvic Medicine: Neurogenic Voiding Dysfunction (MP07)1 Apr 2019MP07-14 VALIDATION OF UPPER EXTREMITY MOTOR FUNCTION AS A KEY PREDICTOR OF BLADDER MANAGEMENT FOLLOWING SPINAL CORD INJURY Christopher Elliott, Sara Lenherr*, Jeremy Myers, John Stoffel, Blayne Welk, Sean Elliott, and Kazuko Shem Christopher ElliottChristopher Elliott More articles by this author , Sara Lenherr*Sara Lenherr* More articles by this author , Jeremy MyersJeremy Myers More articles by this author , John StoffelJohn Stoffel More articles by this author , Blayne WelkBlayne Welk More articles by this author , Sean ElliottSean Elliott More articles by this author , and Kazuko ShemKazuko Shem More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000555098.92014.58AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: In those unable to volitionally void after spinal cord injury (SCI), clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) is considered the gold standard in bladder management. Despite physician recommendation however, many persons with SCI choose alternative bladder management methods. Our prior research has identified that increased upper extremity (UE) motor function is highly predictive of increased CIC adoption and adherence after SCI. Our findings however have been questioned as the UE motor function scale used was based on expert opinion only. Our aim was to reexamine the role of UE motor function using a distinct validated instrument. METHODS: We examined the NBRG registry, a multicenter, prospective, observational study assessing patient reported outcomes among persons with SCI. We included all participants who were unable to volitionally void one year or more post-injury. Participants were dichotomized by bladder management (CIC vs other). In addition to demographic and clinical characteristics, UE motor function was examined using the SCI-Fine Motor Function Index employing a validated categorization scheme (1. no activities requiring hand function, 2. some activities involving gross hand movement, 3. some activities requiring dexterity or coordinated upper extremity movement or 4. most activities requiring dexterity and coordinated upper extremity movement). RESULTS: A total of 1326 individuals met inclusion criteria (66% performing CIC, 60% male and 82% Caucasian). On multivariate analysis, increasing UE motor function was statistically associated with an increased odds of performing CIC; the absolute proportion performing CIC as the SCI-Fine Motor Function Index increased was 37.9%, 34.2%, 57.1% and 78.6% respectively. Increasing age, increasing years since injury, obese females, non-white race, increasing Charlson comorbidity score and worse SF-12 physical scores were all associated with a significantly decreased odds of performing CIC (Table 1). CONCLUSIONS: In persons with SCI who are unable to volitionally void, UE motor function is highly associated with CIC adoption/adherence after SCI. These results validate our prior study findings and continue to suggest that UE motor function may predict the use of CIC more than any other factor following SCI. Source of Funding: Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) CER14092138. San Jose, CA; Salt Lake City, UT; Ann Arbor, MI; Ontario, Canada; Minneapolis, MN; San Jose, CA© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 201Issue Supplement 4April 2019Page: e95-e95 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Christopher Elliott More articles by this author Sara Lenherr* More articles by this author Jeremy Myers More articles by this author John Stoffel More articles by this author Blayne Welk More articles by this author Sean Elliott More articles by this author Kazuko Shem More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,032 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,021 | 0,010 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».