Effect of Spinal Cord Injury on Quality of Life of Affected Soldiers in India: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

Study DesignA prospective cross-sectional study with convenience sampling approach was done to assess quality of life (QoL) in 100 soldiers and veterans affected by spinal cord injury (SCI).PurposeSCI affects almost every aspect of the life of an affected individual. This study was done to measure the impact of SCI on QoL of affected soldiers and veterans using the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire.Overview of LiteratureThe devastating effect of SCI on QoL is well known. However, this study is unique in that it includes soldiers and veterans, who constitute a large, but excluded, cohort in most demographic studies.MethodsA cross-sectional study was done at two SCI rehabilitation centres of the Indian armed forces. Data was collected by face-to-face interviews from 100 patients, which included both sociodemographic data as well as all the questions included in WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.ResultsAge and marital status did not have any influence on QoL. Level of injury (paraplegic or quadriplegic), level of education and presence of other medical co-morbidities had the most significant influence on QoL. Presence of other medical co-morbidities had a negative influence on QoL.ConclusionsIdentification of factors having a positive and negative influence on QoL help in formulating measures and policies that positively influence the QoL following SCI in soldiers. Future longitudinal studies with larger sample sizes and assessment of additional variables in addition to WHOQOL-BREF, like presence/absence of secondary complications, are required to bring about policy changes to provide SCI patients with additional support and increased access to equipment or lifestyle interventions.

Assessment of quality of life in relation to spasticity severity and socio-demographic and clinical factors among patients with spinal cord injury

“…41 Severity of impairment, duration of injury, age, sex, race, marital and educational status, medical complications, self-perceived health and mobility were reported to be associated with QOL in some studies, [41][42][43][44][45][46] while others reported no such associations. [47][48][49][50] Our findings revealed severity of spasticity but none of sociodemographic (age, sex, marital or educational status) and clinical (duration of SCI, aetiology of SCI and AIS category) factors to predict poorer QOL in SCI patients. Likewise, in past study among SCI patients, severity of spasticity but not severity of injury was shown to correlate with life satisfaction.…”

Health status, quality of life and socioeconomic situation of people with spinal cord injuries six years after discharge from a hospital in Bangladesh

“…Participation (defined here as involvement in life situations [31]) was captured through the participation in society items of the WHODAS 2.0. The median (IQR) score was 12/40 points (6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17) indicating that participants had some problems with participation, but the level of problems that participants experienced was not as high as expected. For example, these scores are lower than those reported in comparable studies from Canada (mean = 14 points) [32] and Taiwan (mean = 23 points) [19].…”

“…The results of this study are valuable because most of what we know about the health status, quality of life and socioeconomic situation of people with SCI living in LMICs come from cross-sectional studies of samples of convenience [8][9][10][11][12]. These types of studies are vulnerable to selection bias.…”

“…The only marked difference was with the WHODAS 2.0 scores. At 2 years the median (IQR) WHODAS 2.0 was 24 (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26) and at 6 years it was 12 (6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17) points, reflecting increased participation with time.…”

“…However, there is very little information about these outcomes for people living with SCI in low-and middleincome countries (LMICs). Most of what has been described comes from small samples of convenience [8][9][10][11][12]. Such studies may be biased and therefore may not provide an accurate picture of the real situation.…”