Upper extremity motor score required for clean intermittent catheterization in individuals with spinal cord injury.

Authors

Takayuki Sasaki, Ryosuke Takahashi, Kenjiro Imada, Masami Komiya, Ryosuke Ideta, Kensuke Kubota, Takeshi Maeda

Published in

Spinal cord. Aug 08, 2026. Epub Aug 08, 2026.

Abstract

Retrospective cohort study.
To identify sex- and age-stratified cutoff values of the upper extremity motor score (UEMS) that discriminate independent clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) acquisition and to examine whether UEMS assessed at 4 weeks post-injury predicts CIC acquisition in individuals with motor-complete spinal cord injury (SCI).
A specialized spinal cord injury center in Japan.
We included individuals with traumatic motor-complete SCI (American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale [AIS] A/B) hospitalized ≥4 weeks and classified as AIS A/B at discharge (n = 194). UEMS was assessed in 194 individuals at discharge and in 153 individuals at 4 weeks post-injury. The outcome was independent CIC at discharge. Participants were stratified by sex and age (<65 vs ≥65 years). UEMS cutoffs at discharge and 4 weeks were derived using receiver operating characteristic analyses, and area under the curve (AUC) was reported.
Independent CIC was acquired by 91/194 (47%). Discharge UEMS cutoffs (AUC) were: males <65, 19 (0.97); males ≥65, 28 (0.97); females <65, 24 (0.95); females ≥65, 50 (0.96). At 4 weeks, corresponding cutoffs (AUC) were 13 (0.98), 23 (0.96), 19 (1.00), and 47 (0.90), in the same order. Study-specific equivalent motor levels corresponding to each UEMS cutoff were C6/C7/C6/T1 at discharge and C5/C6/C6/T1 at 4 weeks.
UEMS yielded sex- and age-specific thresholds with good-to-excellent discrimination for CIC acquisition in traumatic motor-complete SCI. UEMS at 4 weeks may support early prediction of CIC acquisition by discharge; study-specific equivalent motor levels may aid interpretation.

PMID:
42567879
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 08 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.