Observational studyPloS one2024
Is mechanism of injury associated with outcome in spinal trauma? An observational cohort study from Tanzania.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- What drives clinic follow-up after traumatic spinal injury? An observational cohort study from Tanzania.BMJ open · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTraumatic spinal injury (TSI) is a disease of significant global health burden, particularly in low and middle-income countries where road traffic-related trauma is increasing. This study compared the demographics, injury patterns, and outcomes of TSI caused by road traffic accidents (RTAs) to non-traffic related TSI.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted using a neurotrauma registry from the Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute (MOI) in Tanzania, a national referral center for spinal injuries. Patient sociodemographic characteristics, injury level, and severity were compared across mechanisms of injury. Neurological improvement, neurological deterioration, and mortality were compared between those sustaining TSI through an RTA versus non-RTA, using univariable and multivariable analyses.
resultsA total of 626 patients were included, of which 302 (48%) were RTA-related. The median age was 34 years, and 532 (85%) were male. RTAs had a lower male preponderance compared to non-RTA causes (238/302, 79% vs. 294/324, 91%, p<0.001) and a higher proportion of cervical injuries (144/302, 48% vs. 122/324, 38%, p<0.001). No significant differences between RTA and non-RTA mechanisms were found in injury severity, time to admission, length of hospital stay, surgical intervention, neurological outcomes, or in-hospital mortality. Improved neurological outcomes were associated with incomplete injuries (AIS B-D), while higher mortality rates were linked to cervical injuries and complete (AIS A) injuries.
conclusionOur study in urban Tanzania finds no significant differences in outcomes between spinal injuries from road traffic accidents (RTAs) and non-RTA causes, suggesting the need for equitable resource allocation in spine trauma programs. Highlighting the critical link between cervical injuries and increased mortality, our findings call for targeted interventions across all causes of traumatic spinal injuries (TSI). We advocate for a comprehensive trauma care system that merges efficient pre-hospital care, specialized treatment, and prevention measures, aiming to enhance outcomes and ensure equity in trauma care in low- and middle-income countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.