Computer-assisted robotic device for upper limb interventions for a patient with an incomplete cervical level spinal cord injury.

A man in his 50s with an incomplete cervical spinal cord injury underwent a 3-week occupational therapy programme using a computer-assisted robotic device for the upper limbs (Diego) in an acute care spinal injury unit. The patient and their partner reported their experience. Range of motion (ROM), muscle strength, pain, fatigue, independence and occupational performance are reported. Improvements occurred in upper limb ROM (shoulder and elbow), muscle strength (right elbow extensors), fatigue and functional status. Whether the results in this patient with the Diego were the same or better than standard care could not be determined. Preliminary findings suggest that the Diego was feasible for rehabilitation in an acute setting in our patient. However, it may not be suitable for all patients and a large comparative study with other therapies is needed. A limitation in the use of the Diego relates to the initial cost of the device ($A150 000).

The Need for a Specialized Neurocognitive Screen and Consistent Cognitive Impairment Criteria in Spinal Cord Injury: Analysis of the Suitability of the Neuropsychiatry Unit Cognitive Assessment Tool.

The assessment of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) following spinal cord injury (SCI) is vital. However, there are no neurocognitive screens which have been developed specifically to meet the unique requirements for SCI, nor are there consistent MCI criteria applied to determine the rates of MCI. The aim of this study was to determine the suitability of a neurocognitive screen for assessing MCI in adults with SCI. A total of 127 participants were recruited. Socio-demographic and injury related variables were assessed. All participants completed the screen. Descriptive statistics are provided for total/domain screen scores and all items, and the screen's ability to distinguish MCI was examined. Congeneric confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were employed to investigate structural validity. The screen total score was sensitive to differences in neurocognitive capacity, as well as for time since the injury occurred (p < 0.01). The MCI rate ranged between 17−36%. CFA revealed attention and visuoconstruction domains had an adequate model fit and executive function had poor fit, while CFA models for memory and language did not fit the data (did not converge), hence could not be determined. While the screen differentiated between those with MCI and those without, and MCI as a function of time since injury, limitations of its suitability for assessing MCI after SCI exist, demonstrating the need for a specialized neurocognitive screen for adults with SCI.