Connecting Researchers and Clinicians Before Connecting the Injured Spinal Cord

Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil, 2023 · DOI: 10.46292/sci22-00044 · Published: July 1, 2023

Spinal Cord Injury Research Methodology & Design

Simple Explanation

This study addresses the challenge of translating research findings from animal models of spinal cord injury (SCI) to human clinical practice. The authors suggest that a lack of common understanding of terminology between researchers and clinicians contributes to this translational gap. The study used the Delphi technique, involving multiple rounds of surveys with SCI experts, to achieve consensus on the definitions of commonly used terms. This iterative process aimed to clarify terminology and improve communication between preclinical and clinical communities. The ultimate goal is to foster better mutual understanding and accelerate the translational process, leading to improved outcomes for individuals with SCI. The study provides recommendations for improved communication and understanding between preclinical and clinical communities.

Study Duration

Not specified

Participants

Experts (researchers and/or clinicians) in SCI

Evidence Level

Not specified

Key Findings

1
The study identified common definitions for 15 terms used in SCI research and clinical practice, including 'anatomically complete spinal cord injury', 'functionally complete spinal cord injury', 'neuromodulation', 'physical exercise', 'physical rehabilitation', 'plasticity', 'task specificity', 'training intensity', 'recovery', 'repair', 'compensation', 'regeneration', 'physical function', 'physiological function', and 'chronic'.
2
Consensus could not be reached for the terms 'acute', 'translational research', and 'sprouting', indicating persistent differences in understanding and usage of these terms within the SCI field.
3
The term 'acute' has different meanings based on context; preclinical researchers tend to define it based on pathophysiological responses, whereas clinicians define it based on clinical time course and neurological recovery.

Research Summary

This study investigated the differences in how researchers and clinicians define common terms used in spinal cord injury (SCI) research and clinical practice. The Delphi technique was used to achieve consensus on definitions for key terms. The research found that different terminology contributes to the gap between preclinical and clinical research and clinical application. This suggests that increased communication among different disciplines could be a way to advance the field. The study resulted in common definitions for 15 terms, but failed to reach consensus on others like 'acute,' 'translational research,' and 'sprouting,' highlighting the need for continued clarification and contextualization of terminology in the SCI field.

Practical Implications

Improved Communication

Defining and contextualizing terminology can improve communication and collaboration between preclinical researchers and clinicians.

Enhanced Translational Research

A shared understanding of key terms may facilitate the translation of research findings from animal models to clinical practice.

Informed Clinical Practice

Clarifying definitions of terms related to SCI severity and recovery can lead to more consistent and effective clinical assessment and treatment strategies.

Study Limitations

1
The study terminated the Delphi process after three rounds, and definitions for words that did not reach consensus in Survey 3 may have reached consensus in Survey 4.
2
The number of clinicians was fewer than nonclinicians, which potentially contributes to response bias.
3
Consumers and families were not included in this survey in order to limit the initial scope.

Your Feedback

Was this summary helpful?

Back to Spinal Cord Injury