Search

Systematic scoping review The purpose of this study was to understand the barriers to accessing upper extremity (UE) reconstructive surgery among those living with tetraplegia, and to identify gaps in knowledge. Using standardized scoping review methods, a literature search was conducted using four databases and 1069 articles were procured. Two independent reviewers systematically screened the articles in two phases. Retrieved articles underwent thematic analysis using a constructivist grounded theory methodology. The reviewed articles (n = 25) were published between 2002 and 2019, and study designs included: cross-sectional (64%), retrospective (16%), and review articles (8%). Common barriers to UE reconstruction were categorized into factors related to patients, providers, and systems. These general domains included lack of awareness of UE reconstruction and its benefits among people with tetraplegia and providers, poor interdisciplinary working relationships, and a lack of specialized centers that provide these reconstructive surgeries. Specific patient-related barriers related to intrinsic (coping skills, trust, fear) and extrinsic (support network, finances, postoperative course) factors that influenced decision-making. There are many barriers that prevent individuals with tetraplegia from accessing surgery at different levels of the healthcare system. Establishing specialized centers with strong interdisciplinary working relationships and raising awareness about the advantages and disadvantages of UE reconstruction through peer networks may help to improve accessibility. Using a value-based, patient-centered approach by exploring how individuals with SCI weigh each decision factor when considering surgery may help providers develop treatment options that better align with their goals.

Health literacy is the extent to which patients are able to understand and act upon health information. This concept is important for surgeons as their patients have to comprehend the nature, risks and benefits of surgical procedures, adhere to perioperative instructions, and make complex care decisions about interventions. Our review aimed to determine the prevalence of limited health literacy of the surgical patient population. A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed from inception until January 14th 2017 for experimental and observational studies reporting surgical patients' health literacy measurement. Overall pooled proportion of surgical patients with limited health literacy was calculated using a random-effects model and methodologic quality was assessed. A total of 40 studies representing 18,895 surgical patients were included in our quantitative synthesis. Pooled estimate of limited health literacy was 31.7% (95%CI 24.7-39.2%, I2 99.0%). There was low risk of bias among the majority of the 51 studies included in the qualitative synthesis. Statistical heterogeneity could not be fully accounted for by methodologic quality or patient and surgical characteristics. However, some of the heterogeneity was accounted by measurement tool [combined proportions with the REALM and NVS of 35.6 (95%CI 31.5-39.9, I2 73.0%)]. A number of different health literacy measurement tools were used (19 overall). Our review demonstrates a high prevalence of limited health literacy among surgical patients with considerable heterogeneity. Our findings suggest the importance of recognizing and addressing surgical patients with limited health literacy and the need for standardization in measurement tools.

INTRODUCTION: Nerve transfers are used routinely for reconstruction of hand function following lower motor neuron lesions. In people with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI), this novel and alternate reconstruction option may be useful to restore prehension and grasp, and improve hand function. CASE PRESENTATION: A 34-year-old male presented 12 years post-mid-cervical SCI. Pre-operative electrodiagnostic studies revealed intact lower motor neurons below the SCI level. He elected to undergo nerve transfer surgery to restore hand function. Intraoperative evaluation led to the transfer of a brachialis nerve to several median nerve recipient branches. Post surgery, he was discharged home and resumed activities of daily living. He achieved independent thumb and finger flexion function and continued to exhibit functional improvement at 4 years post surgery. DISCUSSION: These results should prompt referral for consideration of nerve transfer surgery—an exciting alternative to tendon transfer and neuroprostheses.