Priorities of Spinal Cord Injured Population – A Survey
American Journal of Applied Psychology
Volume 6, Issue 6, November 2017, Pages: 183-187
Received: May 22, 2016; Accepted: Feb. 4, 2017; Published: Dec. 19, 2017
Views 2388      Downloads 164
Namrata, Department of Physiotherapy, College of Applied Education and Health Sciences, Meerut, India
Shazia Mattu, Department of Physiotherapy, College of Applied Education and Health Sciences, Meerut, India
Article Tools
Follow on us
In the united states alone, there are more than 200,000 individuals living with a chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). Healthcare for these individuals creates a significant economic burden for the country, not to mention the physical, psychological, and social suffering these people endure every day. Regaining partial function can lead to greater independence, thereby improving quality of life. To ascertain what functions are most important to the SCI population, in regard to enhancing quality of life, a novel survey was performed in which subjects were asked to rank seven functions in order of their importance to their quality of life. The aim of present study was to evaluate the priorities of spinal cord injured population depending on their level of lesion and improvement of which function will make improvement in quality of their life. A total number of 71 subjects were taken. The questionnaire was made to be filled by all the participants through personal interview, Emails and telephonic interviews. There was a significant variation in priorities of spinal cord injured population.
Quality of Life, Spinal Cord Injury, Priorities
To cite this article
Namrata, Shazia Mattu, Priorities of Spinal Cord Injured Population – A Survey, American Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 6, No. 6, 2017, pp. 183-187. doi: 10.11648/j.ajap.20170606.17
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Ackery A, Tator C, Krassioukov A. A global perspective on spinal cord injury epidemiology. J Neurotrauma 2004; 21: 1355–1370.
Stiens SA, Bergman SB, Formal CS. Spinal cord injuryrehabilitation. 4. Individual experience, personal adaptation, and social perspectives. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997; 78: S65–S72.
Stiens SA, Kirshblum SC, Groah SL, McKinley WO, Gittler MS. Spinal cord injury medicine. 4. Optimalparticipation in life after spinal cord injury: physical, psychosocial, and economic reintegration into the environment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: S72–S81.
www. Journal of neurotrauma. Com, volume 21, number 10, 2004, maryannlibert, inc.
BRINDLEY, G. S. (1994). The first 500 patients with sacral anteriorroot stimulator implants: general description. Paraplegia 32, 795–805.
Nepomuceno C et al. Pain in patients with spinal cordinjury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1979; 60: 605 ± 609.
Turner JA, Cardenas DD. Chronic pain problems in individuals with spinal cord injuries. Semin Clin Neuropsychiatry 1999; 4: 186 ± 194.
Rose M, Robinson JE, Ells P, Cole JD. Pain following spinal cord injury: results from a postal survey [letter]. Pain 1988; 34: 101 ± 102.
Bonica JJ. Introduction: Semantic, Epidemiologic, and Educational Issues. In: Casey KL (ed) Pain and Central Nervous System Disease. First edn. Raven Press: New York 1991, pp 13±30.
Fenollosa P et al. Chronic pain in the spinal cord injured: statistical approach and pharmacological treatment. Paraplegia 1993; 31: 722 ± 729.
Anke AG, Stenehjem AE, Stanghelle JK. Pain and lifequality within 2 years of spinal cord injury. Paraplegia 1995; 33: 555 ± 559.
Kennedy P, Frankel H, Gardner B, Nuseibeh I. Factorsassociated with acute and chronic pain following traumatic spinal cord injuries. Spinal Cord 1997; 35: 814 ± 817.
StormerSet al. Chronic pain/dysaesthesiae in spinal cordinjury patients: results of a multicentre study. Spinal Cord 1997; 35: 446 ± 455.
Demirel G, Yllmaz H, Gencosmanoglu B, Kesiktas N. Pain following spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 1998; 36: 25 ± 28.
Rintala DH et al. Chronic pain in a community-basedsample of men with spinal cord injury: prevalence, severity, and relationship with impairment, disability, handicap, and subjective well-being. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1998; 79: 604 ± 614.
Beric A. Post-spinal cord injury pain states [editorial]. Pain 1997; 72: 295 ± 298.
Siddall PJ, Yezierski RP, Loeser JD. Pain following Spinal Cord Injury: Clinical features, Prevalence, and Taxonomy. IASP Newsletter 2000; 3: 3 ± 7.
Boivie J. Central Pain. In: Wall PD, Melzack R (eds) Textbook of pain. Third edn. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh 1994: pp 871 ± 902.
Siddall PJ, Yezierski RP, Loeser JD. Pain following Spinal Cord Injury: Clinical features, Prevalence, and Taxonomy. IASP Newsletter 2000; 3: 3 ± 7.
Anderson KD. Targeting recovery: priorities of thespinal cord injured population. J Neurotrauma 2004; 21: 1371–1383.
Anderson KD, Borisoff JF, Johnson RD, Stiens SA, Elliott SL. The impact of spinal cord injury on sexual function: concerns of the general population. Spinal Cord 2007; 45: 328–337 (this issue).
Biering-S_rensen F, S_nksen J. Sexual function in spinalcord lesioned men. Spinal Cord 2001; 39: 455–470.
Ramos AS, Samso´ JV. Specific aspects of erectile dysfunctionin spinal cord injury. Int J Impot Res 2004.
S42–S4516 Bird VG, Brackett NL, Lynne CM, Aballa TC, Ferrell SM. Reflexes and somatic responses as predictors of ejaculationby penile vibratory stimulation in men with spinal cordinjury. Spinal Cord 2001; 39: 514–519.
Courtois F, Geoffrion R, Landry E, Be´langer M. H-Reflexand physiologic measures of ejaculation in men with spinalcord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 910–918.
Sheel AW, Krassioukov AV, Inglis JT, Elliott SL. Autonomic dysreflexia during sperm retrieval in spinalcord injury: influence of lesion level and sildenafil citrate. J Appl Physiol 2005; 99: 53–58.
Hanson RW, Franklin MR. Sexual loss in relation to other functional losses for spinal cord injured males. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1976; 57: 291–293.
Anderson KD. Targeting recovery: Priorities of the spinalcord injured population. J Neurotrauma 2004; 21: 1371–1383.
Snoek GJ, Ijzerman MJ, Hemens HJ, Biering-Sorensen F. Survey of the needs of patients with spinal cord injury: Impact and priority for improvement in hand function in tetraplegics. Spinal Cord 2004; 42: 526-532.
Freehafter AA, Vonhann E, Allen V. Tendon transfer to improve grasp after injuries of the cervical spinal cord. j Bone Joint Surg 1974; 56A: 951-959.
Moberg e. Surgical treatment for absent single-hand grip and elbow extension in quadriplegia. Principles and preliminary experience. J Bone Joint Surg 1975; 57A: 196-206.
Zacolli E. Surgery for the quadriplegics hand with active, strong wrist extension preserved. A study of 97 cases. Clin Orthop 1975; 112: 101-113.
Lamb DW, Chan KM. Surgical reconstruction of the upper limb in traumatic tetraplegia. A review of 41 patients. J Bone Joint Surg 1983; 65B: 291-298.
House JH, Shannon MA. Restoration of strong grasp and lateral pinch in tetraplegia: a comparsion of two methods of thumb control in each patient. J Hand Surg 1985; 10A: 22-29.
Fride’n J. Tendon Transfers in Reconstructive Hand surgery. Taylor and Francis: Oxford, 2005.
JF JR, Donovan WH, Ducker TB, et al. International standards for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury. American Spinal Injury Association. Spinal Cord 1997; 35: 266-274.
Marino RJ, Barros T, Biering – Sorensen F, Burns SP, Donovan WH, Graves De, et al. International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med 2003; 26 Suppl 1. S50-S 56.
Simpson LA, Eng JJ, Hsieh JT, Wolfe DL. The health and life priorities of individuals with spinal cord injury; a systematic review J Neurotrauma 2012; 29: 424-439.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186