
==== Front
Spinal Cord
Spinal Cord
Spinal Cord
1362-4393
1476-5624
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39014196
1002
10.1038/s41393-024-01002-8
Review Article
Bowel burdens: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the relationships between bowel dysfunction and quality of life after spinal cord injury
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2754-0085
Sober-Williams Elin K. 12
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2391-5353
Lee Rebekah H. Y. 12
Whitehurst David G. T. 23
McBride Christopher B. 4
Willms Rhonda 256
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2720-8042
Claydon Victoria E. victoria_claydon@sfu.ca

12
1 https://ror.org/0213rcc28 grid.61971.38 0000 0004 1936 7494 Department of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC Canada
2 grid.17091.3e 0000 0001 2288 9830 International Collaboration On Repair Discoveries (ICORD), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC Canada
3 https://ror.org/0213rcc28 grid.61971.38 0000 0004 1936 7494 Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC Canada
4 grid.427952.f 0000 0004 9335 6339 Spinal Cord Injury British Columbia, Vancouver, BC Canada
5 grid.498786.c 0000 0001 0505 0734 GF Strong Rehabilitation Centre, Spinal Cord Injury Program, Vancouver Coastal Health, Vancouver, BC Canada
6 https://ror.org/03rmrcq20 grid.17091.3e 0000 0001 2288 9830 Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC Canada
16 7 2024
16 7 2024
2024
62 9 495506
26 4 2023
24 5 2024
29 5 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Study design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives

Many individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) experience autonomic dysfunction, including profound impairments to bowel and cardiovascular function. Neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD) is emerging as a potential determinant of quality of life (QoL) after SCI. For individuals with high-level lesions ( > T6), bowel care-related autonomic dysreflexia (B-AD; profound episodic hypertension) further complicates bowel care. We aimed to evaluate the extent of bowel dysfunction after SCI, and the impact of bowel dysfunction on QoL after SCI.

Methods

We searched five databases to identify research assessing the influence of NBD or B-AD on QoL after SCI. Metrics of bowel dysfunction (fecal incontinence [FI], constipation, time to complete, and B-AD) and QoL data were extracted and synthesised. Where possible, meta-analyses were performed.

Results

Our search identified 2042 titles, of which 39 met our inclusion criteria. Individuals with SCI identified problems with NBD (74.7%), FI (56.9%), and constipation (54.6%), and 49.3% of individuals with SCI > T6 experienced B-AD. Additionally, 40.3% of individuals experienced prolonged defecation ( > 30 min). Moderate/severe deterioration in QoL due to NBD was reported by 55.5% of individuals with SCI, with negative impacts on physical, emotional, and social health-related QoL associated with inflexibility of bowel routines, fear of accidents, and loss of independence.

Conclusion

Bowel dysfunction and bowel care challenges are prevalent and disabling for individuals with SCI, with a profoundly negative impact on QoL. Improving bowel management is a key target to improve QoL for those living with SCI.

Subject terms

Quality of life
Digestive signs and symptoms
issue-copyright-statement© International Spinal Cord Society 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Over 296,000 Americans [1] and 86,000 Canadians [2] live with a spinal cord injury (SCI). In addition to motor and sensory deficits, SCI can also disrupt descending autonomic pathways, with profound consequences to autonomic processes including cardiovascular and bowel function. Neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD) after SCI can be complicated by non-neurogenic factors, and often presents with constipation and fecal incontinence (FI). While NBD can be managed with carefully planned bowel routines, these programmes may be inflexible and time consuming, imposing limitations to lifestyle and participation in activities away from home [3, 4]. NBD is a major life-limiting problem [5], and its impact is reported to exceed other autonomic and motor deficits [3, 6]. Indeed, bowel management is a potential determinant of quality of life (QoL) for those with SCI [7].

While normal bowel emptying can be compromised at all lesion levels, patterns of NBD differ according to lesion level. Individuals with upper motor neuron bowel dysfunction (SCI at or above T12) typically experience reflexive NBD [8], where excessive muscle tone in the colon wall and anal sphincters results in increased colonic transit time and constipation [9]. The associated inability to voluntarily relax the anal sphincter necessitates chemical or mechanical stimuli to trigger reflex defecation [8]. Individuals with lower motor neuron injuries (below T12) typically experience areflexic NBD characterised by reduced peristalsis, coupled with reduced colonic and sphincter tone. Consequently, individuals with an areflexic bowel experience constipation, but are also at an increased risk of FI as the external anal sphincters are relaxed [8].

For individuals with high-level injuries (at or above the level of sympathetic innervation (T6) to the splanchnic vasculature), autonomic dysreflexia (AD) is a cardiovascular complication that often intersects with bowel function [10]. AD refers to profound hypertension secondary to sensory stimuli below the lesion [3, 11]. Bowel impaction and bowel management techniques are among the most potent stimuli for AD [12]. Episodes of AD are associated with high morbidity and mortality [13–15], are often highly symptomatic [16, 17], and can occur multiple times per day [18], which can profoundly interfere with activities of daily living and QoL [3, 6, 19].

Given the complexity of bowel care challenges, individuals with SCI establish routines to regulate their bowel movements and manage dysfunction. These routines require planning, substantial time to complete, and involve both bowel care (the process of bowel emptying, often involving assistive techniques such as digital rectal stimulation or manual evacuation) and a surrounding bowel program (consideration of diet and fluid intake, activity, medications, and assistive devices) [20]. Due to impaired mobility and hand function, personal assistance may be required to complete bowel care. Regular scheduling is critical [20], which impacts QoL by limiting flexibility, the ability to work away from home, and participation in social activities [3, 5, 6], leading to feelings of frustration and discontent [21]. Simply stated, “the bowel rules” [20].

While existing reviews explore bowel problems in the context of specific management techniques [22–24], none have systematically evaluated the full landscape of NBD post-SCI and the ongoing bowel care-related challenges faced by individuals with SCI, including FI, constipation, bowel care-related AD (B-AD), and the burden of care routines. In this community-partnered study, we conducted a systematic review to examine quantitative (collective data summaries) and qualitative (perspectives of those with lived experience in their own narrative) evidence regarding: (i) the extent of bowel dysfunction after SCI, as defined by the timing of bowel emptying, presence of FI and constipation, and the prevalence of B-AD; and (ii) the impact of bowel dysfunction on QoL after SCI.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews [25] and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [26] guidelines.

Databases and search strategy

A literature search across five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase) was performed (September 7th 2022). Search terms were developed through a literature search, MeSH term search, and in consultation with a research librarian who specializes in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The final keyword list and search strategy comprised terms for QoL and bowel dysfunction or B-AD after SCI (Supplemental Table 1). Articles identified from database searches were compiled using Zotero (version 5.0.96.1).

Eligibility criteria and study selection

Articles were evaluated for eligibility first through title and abstract screening, then through full text screening. Both steps were completed by two independent reviewers (EKSW and RHYL). Articles were included if they were peer-reviewed, available online, included data on participants aged 18 years and older with SCI (traumatic or non-traumatic, any level or severity of injury, and injury duration of at least six months at time of study), included data on NBD and/or B-AD, and evaluated impacts of these conditions on QoL. We excluded case reports, case series, grey literature, or articles about a non-human or non-SCI population. Articles written in languages other than English were translated for evaluation. In cases of disagreement between the two reviewers, an expert in the field (VEC) helped establish a consensus. The reasons for excluding full-text articles were recorded.

Data extraction

Data extraction from the included articles was completed independently by two reviewers (EKSW and RHYL) in duplicate, and in the case of any disagreement, an expert in the field (VEC) was consulted. Where available, data extraction included publication details, study design, study primary and secondary outcomes, population characteristics (traumatic/non-traumatic SCI, sample size, sex, age, and injury duration), and injury characteristics (lesion level and severity of motor and sensory impairment). QoL instruments and scores were extracted, along with measures of bowel function: frequency of bowel emptying, time to complete bowel care, and whether bowel routines were successful, as evaluated by the severity and frequency of constipation and incontinence episodes.

Quality evaluation

Quality evaluation of articles selected for inclusion in the analyses was performed using the Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool [27]. This tool is a revised and enhanced version of the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD) [28] that enhances its applicability for use in health research, and particularly for systematic reviews that include diverse study designs and mixed or multi-method studies. It has high inter-rater reliability and content and face validity [27]. As recommended in the scoring guidelines [27] three members of the study team (VEC, RHYL, EKSW) first confirmed the appropriateness of the tool for the present study, agreed upon how to apply the criteria in the context of the work, and independently calibrated the scoring on three randomly selected articles. Once scoring guidelines and consensus were met, the same three team members independently applied the criteria to the remainder of the studies according to the agreed upon approach. In cases of uncertainty or ambiguity in scoring, group consensus was sought to arrive at a final score. All articles were scored based on 13 metrics of quality, with a range for each item of 0 (poor quality) to 3 (high quality), comprising a total score ranging from 0-39. Note that there is no cutoff total score for consideration of high or low quality, rather criteria are intended to be comprehensively and narratively evaluated [27].

Analytic considerations

For time to complete care, routines lasting more than 30 min were considered prolonged [3, 29, 30], and more than 60 minutes clinically problematic [20]. Data are reported as means and standard deviations. Where descriptive data were originally reported using other statistics (e.g., median, range, interquartile range, or confidence interval), means and standard deviations were calculated or estimated [31]. Summary component scores of the 36-item Short Form health survey (SF-36) were calculated from the domain score means and standard deviations, where necessary [32]. Where data were presented only in figures, means and standard deviations were extracted using WebPlotDigitizer (version 4.4; Pacifica, Ca, USA). Analyses were completed in Microsoft Excel (version 16.62). Data visualisation was completed in SigmaPlot (version 14.0) and Microsoft PowerPoint (version 16.64).

Where possible, meta-analyses were performed. Results from questions with comparable language and structure were aggregated as weighted averages (x¯) and reported with the combined sample size. Where studies reported data from two subgroups without indication of statistical significance, unpaired t-tests were performed based on means, standard deviations, and sample size. Aggregate metrics of bowel dysfunction, FI, and time to complete were combined and reported as weighted average (x¯) proportions. A summary estimate of effect for the influence of bowel dysfunction on QoL and satisfaction with bowel care was calculated and visualised using forest plots. Relationships between severity of bowel dysfunction and SF-36 summary component scores were examined by linear regression with Pearson or Spearman correlations, as appropriate.

A three-stage structured analysis adapted from Larsen et al. (2022) was applied to analyse findings from qualitative studies [33]. First, we identified units of meaning (relevant quotes from individuals with SCI that addressed our research questions), then units of significance (the meaning of the quote as defined through a dynamic reading process by two independent reviewers [EKSW and RHYL]), and through interpretation, the overarching theme [33]. All three stages were subject to critical interpretation and discussion by the authors who considered the information in context with the available literature and their own understandings of theoretical concepts [33].

Knowledge partners

To ensure our findings were contextualised to the lived experience of individuals living with SCI and their caregivers, we included local SCI clinicians and an SCI community partner agency (Spinal Cord Injury British Columbia) as knowledge partners in the research. These research users provided critical feedback, insight, and context to the conclusions drawn in the study.

Results

Our search identified 2042 articles. After duplicate removal and screening, 39 articles met our inclusion criteria (Fig. 1). The study characteristics for the included articles are summarised in Table 1. Three papers used interview data, providing a qualitative perspective to the research question. Supplemental Table 2 provides a summary of the outcome measures and instruments used.Fig. 1 PRISMA diagram summarising the study selection process [26].

The search identified 2,042 articles. After screening and eligibility review, 39 articles met our inclusion criteria.

Table 1 Study characteristics.

Study	Traumatic SCI (%)	Sample size (female)	Age (years)	Duration	Injury level (%)	Tetraplegia/Paraplegia (%)	AIS grade (A/B/C/D/E) (%)	AIS complete vs incomplete (%)	
Adriaansen et al. 2016 [49]	91	282 (73)	48a	Chronic	⎯	41/59	68/14/10/8/0	68/32	
Burns et al. 2015 [21]	⎯	19 (6)	42 (13)	Chronic	⎯	53/47	⎯	74/26	
Carlozzi et al. 2013 [19]	78	27 (3)	66 (13)	Chronic	⎯	44/56	-	59/41	
Coggrave et al. 2009 [6]	⎯	1334 (355)	52a	Chronic	C:41; T: 50; L: 8; S: 1b	⎯	⎯	48/43b	
Coggrave et al. 2012 [59]	⎯	92 (28)	56 (9)	Chronic	C: 28; T: 66; L: 4b	⎯	⎯	70/25b	
Craven et al. 2012 [35]	78	357 (61)	54	Chronic	⎯	52/48	⎯	40/60	
Elmelund et al. 2019 [48]	28	684 (684)	55 (20)	⎯	C: 33; T: 25; L: 11; S: 2b	⎯	7/4/11/77/1	7/93	
Erdem et al. 2017 [43]	95	42 (8)	⎯	Chronic	C: 29; T: 57; L: 14	⎯	55/10/26/10/0	55/45	
Gong et al. 2021 [39]	83	101 (26)	41 (15)	⎯	C: 29; T: 49; L: 9; S: 13	⎯	⎯	40/60	
Gorman et al. 2021 [60]	⎯	49 (11)	39 (14)	Chronic	⎯	28/72	A/B: 62; C/D: 38	⎯	
Hicken et al. 2001 [64]	81	106 (8)	36.9	Chronic	⎯	91/9	⎯	9/91	
Hwang et al. 2017 [51]	90b	131 (47)	⎯	Chronic	⎯	59/40	⎯	76/24	
Inskip et al. 2018 [3]	⎯	287	49 (13)	Chronic	C: 45; T: 45; L: 9; S: 1	⎯	⎯	30/70	
Jorgensen et al. 2017	62	123 (36)	63 (9)	Chronic	⎯	⎯	⎯	⎯	
Jorgensen et al. 2021	64	78 (25)	68 (8)	Chronic	⎯	⎯	⎯	⎯	
Kannisto & Rintala 1995 [47]	⎯	35 (10)	31a	Chronic	C: 23; T: 77	⎯	⎯	77/23	
Kim et al. 2012 [45]	93	388 (94)	45 (11)	Chronic	⎯	31/62b	⎯	54/40b	
Koyuncu et al. 2017 [40]	91	55 (13)	36 (12)	Mixedc	C: 18; T: 51; L: 31	⎯	44/20/15/22/0	44/56	
Krogh et al. 1997 [52]	83	424 (124)	41	Chronic	C: 41; T: 37; L: 19b	⎯	⎯	60/40	
Krogh et al. 2006 [41]	75	424 (124)	41	Chronic	C: 43; T: 38; L: 19	⎯	⎯	60/40	
Leduc et al. 2002 [29]	100	30 (4)	40	Chronic	⎯	50/50	70/30/0/0/0	70/30	
Liu et al. 2009 [42]	88	128 (33)	48	Chronic	⎯	28/45b	0/0/73/27/0	0/100	
Locke et al. 2019 [53]	72	1529 (500)	50 (14)	Chronic	⎯	24/70b	⎯	⎯	
Lombardi et al. 2010 [54]	78	23 (8)	36 (9)	⎯	⎯	⎯	0/0/39/61/0	0/100	
Luther et al. 2005 [62]	⎯	296 (3)	⎯	Chronic	⎯	⎯	⎯	⎯	
Lynch et al. 2000 [55]	⎯	467 (83)	44	Chronic	C: 50; T: 31; L: 19	⎯	⎯	50/50	
Mazor et al. 2016 [56]	81	21 (17)	50	Chronic	⎯	⎯	⎯	0/100	
McCarthy et al. 2020 [46]	⎯	50	⎯	Chronic	⎯	⎯	⎯	⎯	
Nevedal et al. 2016 [63]	94	50 (50)	46 (15)	Chronic	⎯	58/42	⎯	46/54	
Nielsen et al. 2017 [58]	69	109 (26)	55	Chronic	C: 9; T: 30; L: 61	⎯	⎯	66/34	
Noonan et al. 2008 [34]	100	70 (13)	51 (18)	Chronic	C: 100	⎯	⎯	⎯	
Pardee et al. 2012 [30]	⎯	241	⎯	⎯	⎯	⎯	⎯	⎯	
Pires et al. 2018 [38]	72	64 (22)	57 (16)	Chronic	C: 39; T: 39; L: 22	⎯	39/13/17/31/0	39/61	
Smith & Decter 2015 [65]	⎯	17 (5)	33	Chronic	C: 47; T: 53	⎯	⎯	⎯	
Stoffel et al. 2021 [61]	⎯	1373 (546)	44 (13)	Chronic	C: 44; T: 47; L/S:9	⎯	26/16/11/3/0b	26/31b	
Sweet et al. 2014	100	1137 (508)	48 (13)	Chronic	⎯	50/50	38/8//20/21/2b	38/51b	
Ture et al. 2022 [44]	100	92 (19)	45 (15)	Chronic	C: 20; T: 47; L: 34	⎯	46/13/11/30/0	46/54	
Van Doorn et al. 2022 [57]	⎯	55 (19)	54 (16)	Chronic	C: 26; T: 53; L:16; b	⎯	27/13/18/16/2b	27/49b	
Westgren & Levi 1998 [36]	100	320 (59)	42	⎯	⎯	39/55b	⎯	⎯	
Where applicable, data are presented as mean (standard deviation) unless otherwise stated or incomplete data were provided. The injury duration was considered chronic if the SCI was sustained greater than 6 months previously and the participants had been discharged from hospital/in-patient rehabilitation. Injury levels are reported as percentages with cervical (C), thoracic (T), lumbar (L) or sacral (S) SCI. Where available the percentage of individuals with paraplegia and tetraplegia are provided. American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grades are provided where possible, with the percentage of individuals with a motor and sensory complete lesion (AIS A) and incomplete (AIS B, C, D, E) indicated.

adenotes only median age provided.

bdenotes some participants listed as “unknown” for this category.

cdenotes a mixed population with 47% chronic SCI, 29% subacute SCI (3–12 months) and 24% acute SCI (0–3 months).

Average total article quality scores based on the QUADS rating scale were 32.3 ± 0.2 (range 22–38). Individual item scores were high for most aspects under consideration, with average scores for 11 of the 13 items being appraised as 2.5 or greater. Individual items scores were poor for two aspects: (i) consideration of stakeholders in the research design or conduct (0.7 ± 0.1) and (ii) critical discussion of strengths and limitations (2.0 ± 0.2).

AIM 1: efficacy of bowel routines and extent of bowel dysfunction

Thirty-three papers addressed Aim 1 (Supplemental Table 3). Bowel function was measured through seven established measures. Sixteen studies used non-established (i.e., study-specific) questionnaires to assess bowel function. A wide range (15–99%; x¯ = 74.7% [n = 2129]) of participants across five studies self-reported problems with bowel dysfunction [6, 34–37]. Across seven studies [n = 901] that used the NBD score in an unmodified format, the NBD severity distribution was: “Very minor” for 28–38% (x¯ = 31.8%), “Minor” for 11–33% (x¯ = 15.7%), “Moderate” for 10-29% (x¯ = 23.1%), and “Severe” for 19–33% (x¯ = 29.5%) of participants [38–44] (Fig. 2A).Fig. 2 Severity of neurogenic bowel dysfunction, frequency of fecal incontinence, and time to complete bowel care in individuals with SCI.

A Across the seven studies (n = 901) that used the Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction (NBD) score unmodified, NBD was problematic for most individuals living with SCI (52.6%). B A weighted average of 56.9% of individuals in 14 studies (n = 4111) experienced fecal incontinence (FI). Seven studies (n = 2010) reported the frequency with which individuals with SCI experienced FI: 4.6% experienced FI daily; 9.4% weekly; 18.5% monthly; and 60.5% less than monthly. C In the self-reported average time to complete bowel care from 6 studies, a weighted average of 70.2% of participants required 30 minutes or less, 25.7% required 31–60 min, and 14.7% required over 60 min. Grey percentages indicate the range of responses in different studies. Red percentages indicate the weighted average. * Indicates data from references [3, 38, 45, 46, 52]; ** indicates data from references [3, 6, 29, 30, 38, 45, 46, 52, 59, 60].

Fecal incontinence

FI was evaluated in 21 studies. In 14 studies, 12–100% (x¯ = 56.9% [n = 4111]) of participants reported experiencing FI [3, 29, 30, 38, 39, 45–53] (Fig. 2B). In the seven studies (n = 2010) that examined the frequency of FI; 2-11% (x¯ = 4.6%) experienced FI daily, 4–26% (x¯ = 9.4%) weekly, 13-26% (x¯ = 18.5%) monthly, and 40-75% (60.5%) less than monthly [3, 38, 45, 46, 48, 52, 53] (Fig. 2B). One study demonstrated that FI occurred more frequently in individuals with a lower level of SCI [3]. Severity of FI was indicated by the Wexner Score with scores of 3.6 and 16.7 (x¯ = 4.3 [n = 495]) [54, 55], and the FISI with scores of 23 and 28 (x¯ = 26.6 [n = 76]) [56, 57]. Higher scores indicate greater frequency of symptoms and symptom-related disruptions.

Constipation

Considering the prevalence of constipation, seven studies found that 11–81% (x¯ = 54.6% [n = 3551]) of participants self-reported problems with constipation [6, 30, 49, 50, 53, 56, 58]. In three studies, 49-54% (x¯ = 52.4% [n = 88]) of participants had prolonged transit time [29, 47, 54].

Frequency and time to complete bowel care

Eight studies considered the frequency with which individuals with SCI complete bowel care. These studies showed that 9–51% (x¯ = 34.7% [n = 943]) of participants performed bowel care daily [3, 30, 38, 45, 46], 48–91% (x¯ = 62.2% [n = 763]) one to six times per week [3, 38, 45–47], and 0–13% (x¯ = 7.3% [n = 728]) less than once per week [3, 38, 45, 46]. Thirteen studies evaluated the time to complete bowel care (Fig. 2C). The self-reported average time to complete was 30 min or less for 16-90% (x¯ = 70.2% [n = 1931]) of participants [3, 38, 45, 46, 52, 59], 31–60 min for 16–46% (x¯ = 25.7% [n = 1237]) of participants [3, 38, 45, 46, 52], and 3–46% (x¯ = 14.7% [n = 2751]) required more than 60 minutes [3, 6, 29, 30, 38, 45, 46, 52, 59, 60].

Frequency of B-AD

Two studies found 45–74% (x¯ = 49.3% [n = 1144]) of those at risk for AD (injury above T6) experienced AD during bowel care [3, 6]. When considering individuals with all lesion levels, six studies report 13–42% (x¯ = 29.3% [n = 1068]) of all respondents experienced AD or symptoms compatible with AD during bowel care [30, 38, 45, 46, 52]. Using the Autonomic Dysfunction Following Spinal Cord Injury (ADFSCI) questionnaire, one study found that ADFSCI scores (corresponding to the frequency and severity of AD) were positively associated with NBD severity (p = 0.02) [61].

AIM 2: the impact of bowel dysfunction on QoL

Thirty-nine papers addressed Aim 2. The impact of bowel care on QoL was considered using bowel care-specific QoL measures in 19 studies (Supplemental Table 4). Of these, established bowel care-specific instruments were used in six papers, while 13 studies used self-drafted bowel care-specific QoL questionnaires. Three studies conducted interviews and extracted themes using an established International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health framework. Additionally, 18 studies reported statistical associations between general (i.e., not bowel care-specific) measures of QoL and bowel management.

Overall impact of bowel dysfunction on QoL

Overall, QoL was negatively impacted by bowel dysfunction [3, 35, 38, 39, 41, 43, 45, 57, 60]. Considering the degree of impact, 27–74% (x¯ = 55.5% [n = 992]) of participants in four studies reported a moderate to severe deterioration in QoL due to bowel dysfunction, as measured by study-specific Likert-type scales [3, 29, 41, 45]. Four studies used a 10-point scale to evaluate the impact of bowel dysfunction on QoL (10=worst effect) (x¯ = 4.98±2.54 [n = 1666] [3, 6, 56, 59] (Fig. 3A).Fig. 3 Impact of bowel dysfunction on quality of life.

Numerical rating scales evaluating (A) the impact of bowel problems on QoL and (B) satisfaction with current bowel management. Data are shown as mean ± standard deviation on a 0–10 scale. Bubble size indicates sample size (log transformed). * Denotes mean and standard deviation calculated from median and range; † indicates the scale direction has been reversed for compatibility; ‡ indicates the scale range was from 1-10.

FI, constipation, and time to complete bowel care were associated with reduced general QoL. Eight studies evaluated the impact of FI on QoL. An adverse effect of FI on QoL was elucidated by direct question [55, 58, 62], and by statistical association (p < 0.05) [39, 41, 45]. Time to complete bowel care was negatively associated with QoL in three studies [3, 41, 45]. Specifically, clinically problematic bowel care routines ( > 60 min) were associated with deteriorations in QoL (p < 0.01) [41, 45]. Concerning constipation, in two of three studies, constipation was significantly (p < 0.05) associated with reduced QoL scores determined using established QoL questionnaires [49, 50, 53].

The effects of B-AD on QoL were studied in three papers by direct question using non-established questionnaires and/or statistical association [3, 30, 45], and in one study using qualitative interview data [19]. One study found that severity of AD symptoms during bowel care was an independent predictor of QoL (p = 0.036) [3]. Other studies reported no difference in QoL [45], or the degree of bowel program satisfaction [30], between those who did and did not identify B-AD as a problem.

Bowel constraints on daily living

Seven studies examined how bowel management might constrain activities of daily living. In two studies, 60–85% (x¯ = 63.6% [n = 1489]) of participants reported that they “fit their lives around their bowel [management]” a little or a lot [3, 6]. Similarly, another study reported that the median of the sample (n = 92) found their bowel care restricted life “a great deal” [59]. These sentiments were echoed in qualitative interview themes that life was controlled by bowel management routines [63], and frustrations with rigid bowel programs and the time to complete bowel care were barriers to activity and spontaneity [21]. Difficult or disturbed bowel evacuation caused some or major restriction in QoL for 25–32% (x¯ = 30.6% [n = 521]) of respondents [52, 58]. Further, activities of daily living were restricted by FI in 15–20% (x¯ = 18.9% [n = 502]) of respondents [52, 58], and by constipation for 16% of respondents [58].

Satisfaction with bowel care

Dissatisfaction with bowel care among individuals with SCI was highlighted in seven studies. In three studies, 23–71% (x¯ = 46.9% [n = 743]) of participants were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their current bowel management routine [3, 30, 62]. Additionally, one study reported that those with bowel problems were less satisfied with life than those without bowel problems (p = 0.018) [37]. Similarly, three studies used a 10-point scale to measure satisfaction with bowel management (10=very satisfied) (x¯ = 3.5 ± 2.5 [n = 1405]) [46, 56, 59] (Fig. 3B). Time to complete (p = 0.001) and ineffective emptying (p < 0.001) were sources of dissatisfaction with bowel care [30].

Health-related QoL themes

While the exact questions varied, several common themes emerged from the 39 studies that addressed Aim 2. These motifs pertain to physical and mental (including subdomains of emotional well-being, and social functioning) health-related QoL.

Physical health

The impact of bowel dysfunction on physical health was discussed in 13 studies. Those who managed their bowels independently reported significantly higher SF-12 physical health component summary (PCS; comprising the physical function, role physical, bodily pain, and general health domains) scores compared to those who were dependent on others for care (p < 0.05) [64]. FI was associated with reduced satisfaction with physical health in one study [49] while another found no significant impact of FI on physical health [48]. Individuals with constipation also reported less satisfaction with physical health [49].

Qualitative analyses in two studies revealed challenges with the lack of bowel predictability (both in terms of inconsistencies in care routines and concerns about FI) [21, 63], secondary medical complications due to bowel dysfunction (e.g., fissures and rectal bleeding), and pain or discomfort with ineffective bowel care [21]. In an interview study on the effects of blood pressure dysregulation, of which B-AD was included, respondents described the symptoms of AD as significant physical health concerns, with one participant noting that the headache associated with B-AD was “the worst pain [they’ve] ever had” [19].

Eight studies examined the PCS scores obtained using the SF-36 (n = 6) [34, 36, 40, 42–44] or SF-12 (n = 2) [61, 64]. The presence [34, 36] and severity [40, 42, 44, 61] of bowel dysfunction were significantly (p < 0.05) negatively associated with physical health-related QoL. Four studies reported both the SF-36 PCS and NBD score. A negative linear relationship was found using data from three studies, whereby those with higher NBD scores had more severe impairments as measured by the SF-36 PCS score (r = −0.637, p = 0.024) [40, 42, 44] (Fig. 4A). One study reported no correlation between the SF-36 PCS and NBD scores (r = -0.187, p = 0.235), but raw scores were not reported, thus not included in the meta-analysis [43].Fig. 4 Meta-analysis of Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction (NBD) score and SF-36 component summary scores.

Data for each study are shown as mean ± standard deviation, with the size of the datapoint proportional to the sample size [40, 42, 44]. A The physical component score (PCS) was negatively correlated (r = −0.637; p = 0.024) with the NBD score. B The mental component score (MCS) was not correlated (r = 0.047; p = 0.885) with the NBD score. The vertical lines denote the range of scores for NBD severity subgroups (very minor, minor, moderate, severe). The horizontal line and red shading denote the mean and standard deviation of American normative SF-36 component summary scores (n = 2474) [32]; a score below this norm indicates reduced QoL. Data from each of the three studies are indicated with different colours and symbols.

Mental health

Six studies assessed mental health-related QoL (global mental health, incorporating psychological, emotional and social well-being) using the SF-36, and the presence or severity of bowel dysfunction, with little agreement in results. The mental health component score (MCS; comprising the vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health domains) was negatively associated (p < 0.05) with bowel problems in two studies [36, 43]. One study found only the role emotional domain score was negatively correlated with increasing NBD severity (p = 0.007) [40]. Three studies reported no significant correlations between the MCS and bowel problems [34, 42, 44]. Combining SF-36 MCS and NBD scores from three studies in a meta-analysis revealed no relationship (r = −0.047, p = 0.885) [40, 42, 44] (Fig. 4B). One study found that individuals with bowel problems were less satisfied with their mental health compared to those without bowel problems (p = 0.002) [37]. In another study, satisfaction with psychological health was significantly reduced in those with constipation (p < 0.01), but not in those with FI [49]. Another study found that those without FI were more satisfied (p < 0.05) with their psychological health compared with those who experienced FI monthly or less [48].

Emotional well-being

The impact of bowel problems on the emotional function (emotion regulation, awareness, differentiation and expression) of individuals with SCI was addressed in seven studies [21, 30, 46, 57, 62, 63, 65]. In general, emotional well-being was negatively impacted by bowel function [30, 46]. In one study, 66% of respondents felt frustrated, impatient, or restless, 40% felt irritable, and 37% felt tearful or upset sometimes, often, or always due to bowel problems [30]. Qualitative analysis of interview themes reveals that this negative emotional overlay is largely due to the loss of autonomy and privacy in bowel care [21, 63], or the physical experience of bowel care after SCI (e.g., the smells after staining, and the experience of digital stimulation) [21]. An adverse impact of AD on emotional well-being was also reported, whereby AD evoked anxiety and fear; one participant recalled that they could “feel [their] mortality” in an episode of AD [19]. Bowel-related embarrassment was evaluated by five studies. While three studies reported that bowel function [57] and accidents in public [21, 63], caused feelings of humiliation, two studies did not find bowel function to be a strong source of social embarrassment [62, 65].

Social function

Social engagement

Nine studies addressed the impact of bowel function on social engagement. Bowel management caused moderate to severe interference with the social lives of 39-75% of participants (x¯ = 49.4% [n = 2272]) in five studies [3, 6, 45, 47, 52]. Fear of FI was reported as a primary limitation to social participation [21], and increased frequency of FI was associated with reduced social QoL [45]. One study found 68% of those with bowel problems were dissatisfied with their extent of social contact [37]. However, bowel problems were seldom the cause of delay or cancellation of social engagements [30, 62]. Addressing the consequences of B-AD on social function, blood pressure dysregulation was found to be a barrier to community integration [19], and B-AD a hindrance to social activities and activities of daily living [3]. One study found no significant deterioration in social function due to B-AD [45].

Relationships

The association between bowel function and personal relationships was discussed in five papers. In two studies, 24–60% (x¯ = 28.4% [n = 1795]) of respondents reported bowel function interfered with personal relationships a little or a lot [3, 6]. In interview responses, bowel dysfunction had a clear negative impact on sexual intimacy and relationships. Interviewees expressed a reluctance to pursue new relationships for fear of having to explain or involve their new partner should FI occur [21, 63]. Requiring the assistance of family members during bowel care reportedly strained familial relations [21, 63], and 41% of those with bowel function were dissatisfied with family life overall [37].

Lifestyle

Bowel-related limitations to lifestyle and participation were noted in seven studies. Using the FIQL, two studies reported a deterioration in lifestyle due to bowel dysfunction [57, 65]. One study found 25% of respondents avoided attending events with no close accessible bathroom [30]. In two studies, bowel management prevented 42–62% (x¯ = 44.9% [n = 1448]) of respondents from staying away from home [3, 6]. Similarly, another study noted that uncertainty of bowel function is a challenge for travel and limits long trips [21]. Two studies reported that bowel problems are a substantial barrier to participation in leisure or sports activities [30, 62].

Work

In six studies, bowel dysfunction and management were found to impair the ability to work [3, 6, 21, 30, 62, 63]. The unpredictability of bowel function and FI was a limiting factor for the pursuit of education and employment [21], and was associated with frustrations surrounding loss of independence [63]. Accordingly, bowel problems limited work attendance for 12–26% (x¯ = 24.4% [n = 1313]) of respondents [6, 30]. One study found that bowel management was a barrier to working away from home for 41% of participants, and B-AD was a hindrance to work [3]. Despite a reduction in work attendance due to bowel dysfunction, one study highlighted that those who worked were generally satisfied with their quality of work and their bowel management did not limit their standard of work [30].

Discussion

This paper provides the first systematic review using quantitative and qualitative evidence to examine the full landscape of bowel care challenges post-SCI and their impact on QoL. Our analyses emphasise the high prevalence of bowel dysfunction, FI, constipation, and B-AD after SCI. Times to complete bowel care are often problematically long. The negative impacts of these bowel care challenges on QoL are wide-ranging and significant, leading to bowel care dissatisfaction, life restriction, and impairing physical, emotional, and social health-related domains of QoL [3, 33, 39, 47].

FI and fear of accidents is common and negatively impacts QoL after SCI

FI or the risk of FI was a consistent QoL-reducing problem for over half the participants studied [4, 21, 39, 63], revealing mistrust in the ability of bowel routines to prevent accidents. Despite the fear of FI, prevention and management tools such as incontinence pads and anal plugs are not used regularly by most individuals with SCI [3]. This may reflect stigma surrounding the use of incontinence pads, or concerns that anal plugs may trigger a reflexive bowel movement. Fear of worsening incontinence is a barrier to changing bowel care practices, perpetuating a cycle of apprehension to change and inaction [66]. The restrictive impact of the fear of FI is most evident in social function-related QoL. FI has been noted as a barrier for the pursuit of work (travel, time flexibility, and bathroom accessibility) [21, 66] and a reason participants hesitate to start new relationships [21, 63]. FI can also complicate perianal wound care and further reduce QoL [45]. Women with SCI report concerns that penetrative sex may trigger involuntary bowel movement [41, 63, 67], highlighting the need to consider the interplay between autonomic dysfunctions after SCI to improve QoL.

Constipation is prevalent with multifaceted effects on QoL

Despite occurring with a similar prevalence to FI, constipation did not provoke a uniformly negative impact on QoL. This may reflect that individuals with SCI do not sense the discomfort of impacted stool if the sensory afferents from the stomach, small intestine, and colon arise below the level of injury [68]. However, constipation may be an intermediary to other factors that reduce QoL; the distended bowel may trigger AD, constipation may increase the bowel care duration if a more extensive bowel routine is required (e.g., laxatives, stool softener, manual evacuation), and risk of FI rises if constipation results in irregular and unsuccessful bowel care [66]. Additionally, constipation is likely exacerbated by other behavioural changes including fluid restriction, a strategy employed by some individuals with SCI for the management of urinary incontinence [66]. This reflects the interconnectivity between bladder and bowel care and highlights the challenges with management of the widespread and interrelated autonomic problems after SCI, which may have additive detrimental impacts on QoL.

Symptomatic B-AD negatively impacts QoL in those with high-level injuries

Evidence for the impact of B-AD on QoL was contradictory, likely due to the range of lived experiences of AD, from symptomatic and distressing, to asymptomatic or ‘silent’. For symptomatic individuals, B-AD was an independent determinant of QoL [3] and is among the leading reasons why some individuals elect to manage bowel care with an ostomy [30, 59, 69]. B-AD may be particularly problematic because the long duration of care means the stimulus for AD is prolonged and the overall AD burden is high [70]. Asymptomatic B-AD is unlikely to impact QoL, however, even with silent AD the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality remains [13–15]. The variable presentations of B-AD highlight the importance of reducing B-AD as a clinical target for all at-risk individuals [70]. Periodic blood pressure monitoring could provide a window into potential blood pressure spikes during bowel care and may aid clinical decisions around optimal care routines. Bowel care management should be personalised and optimized, with consideration of resource availability and financial impacts of the care routines adopted [71].

Prolonged care routines impair QoL after SCI

Time to complete bowel care was an important predictor of QoL and was intertwined with other bowel dysfunction problems. Prolonged bowel care can be the consequence of constipation or an increased number of bowel management approaches, and long bowel care itself may induce a greater burden of AD [70] and an increased risk for pressure wounds [72]. Time to complete is an essential metric of the success of bowel care but is only considered to be clinically problematic when the routine exceeds 1 h [20]. However, over 40% of participants required >30 minutes to complete bowel care [3, 38, 45, 46, 52, 59], far longer than typical care routines for the general population, and this was considered unacceptably long by those living with SCI [21]. These data affirm that the time spent doing bowel care is time not spent doing something else, and highlight the negative impact of time to complete care on QoL and activities of daily living [73]. These data highlight the importance of discussing bowel care options with people with shorter ( < 1 h) care routines that do not meet clinical guidelines for problematic care, but still negatively and meaningfully impact QoL. Certainly, time to complete is a simple and accessible marker for caregivers, clinicians, and people living with SCI to understand if bowel care routines are effective and appropriate [3, 30, 41]. Increases in time to complete should be considered a sign of problematic care.

Bowel dysfunction has a profound effect on multiple domains of QoL

Our results suggest that bowel dysfunction has a particularly negative impact on physical health. This may reflect that the primary scope of the instruments used evaluated the severity of bowel dysfunction from a physical health standpoint. Nevertheless, ineffective bowel care is a key concern for physical health-related QoL, and problems with constipation, FI, and B-AD should be prioritised in clinical care. Importantly, the ability to independently perform care routines was a critical factor for physical health-related QoL [51, 63, 64], and has been emphasised in clinical guidelines [20]. Independence of care allows bowel care to remain a private undertaking, improving social and emotional well-being and limiting reliance on others to complete bowel care [63]. As autonomy of care depends on mobility and hand function [50], bowel care routines should be individually crafted to prioritise and maximise independence.

Associations between bowel dysfunction and mental health were mixed. This may reflect that, with time, individuals with SCI adjust to the expectation that bowel care will be among the challenges they face [66]. However, this does not negate the general dissatisfaction with bowel routines and the associated mental health burden that was a pervasive theme in the studies identified. Common concerns were the negative impact of bowel dysfunction on emotional well-being (largely reflecting loss of autonomy and privacy in conducting care), and the adverse effect of anxiety and fear related to episodes of B-AD and FI. Bowel dysfunction also adversely affected social functioning, hindering community engagement, social participation, work attendance, intimacy, and relationships. Qualitative [21, 63], but not quantitative [62, 65], analyses highlighted embarrassment and humiliation as concerns in the context of bowel management, highlighting the importance of mixed methodological approaches when considering bowel management.

Individuals with SCI experience a hierarchy of care, whereby health goals are prioritised, often necessarily based on the most clinically urgent need [66]. This may mean that, despite the significant QoL consequences, sub-optimal but clinically acceptable bowel routines receive little attention until critically dysfunctional. This may be compounded by the reality that the reasons for adopting a particular care routine may focus on financial constraints, healthcare provider preference, and care aide availability, among other factors, rather than the preference of the individual. These data confirm that improving satisfaction with bowel care is a priority for those living with SCI [7], and access to resources and supports for bowel care should be prioritised. Understanding the limitations of appointment times with health care providers, peer support can be useful for discussions of bowel care routines, providing a trustworthy alternative route for knowledge dissemination and empowerment for individuals with SCI to improve their bowel care [66, 74, 75].

Methodological considerations

We conducted a comprehensive review examining the relationships between bowel care and QoL after SCI, compiling results from studies with diverse methodologies. One key strength of our approach is the inclusive synthesis of quantitative and narrative evidence. Recognising the importance of patient-oriented research, we integrated narrative evidence through the use of secondary analysis of qualitative data using a systematic approach to ensure the lived experiences and perspectives of individuals living with SCI were appropriately reflected in the data [33].

Another strength is the transparent reporting of all studies, with full data extraction provided in the supplementary files, enabling the reader to self-evaluate the evidence upon which our conclusions were made. In addition, we employed a quality evaluation instrument that is particularly suited to our mixed methods approach [27], which incorporated data from numerous instruments and considered quantitative and qualitative evidence. While we note the strengths of this tool, one drawback to a general tool that permits appraisal of studies with broad methodology is that it does not permit detailed evaluation of specific components or facilitate critique of specific data visualisation or reporting (which is highly variable in studies with diverse methodologies). In addition, this tool evaluates the quality of the study with respect to the original study aims, not placed in the context of the present meta-analysis. Nevertheless, in general the tool provided an effective means to appraise article quality, which was high across multiple domains of evaluation. Areas for quality improvement were identified in the involvement of stakeholders, advisory groups, or people with lived experience in informing the work, a key component of integrated knowledge translation [76], as well as in explicit discussion of strengths and limitations to the work. Reduced scores in this area predominantly reflected a focus on limitations to the work, without clearly highlighting research strengths, or focus only on the obvious impact of a small sample size on statistical power, without considering the broader aspects of the study in a more fulsome manner.

We could not stratify results based on SCI or participant characteristics (e.g., sex, age, level of injury, ASIA classification, duration of injury) as these data were either not reported or reported inconsistently. Where available we provided these stratifications in the data tables for the interested reader. Despite reporting challenges, there were suggestions that individuals with higher and more complete lesions experience more severe bowel dysfunction, although those with lower level injuries were predisposed to FI [3, 40, 42, 47, 55]. There were also some reports that women [6, 52], those with longer durations of injury [55], and older individuals [55, 58] experienced more severe bowel dysfunction with a greater impact on QoL, affirming the adverse impact of aging with SCI and age-related comorbidities on the secondary complications of SCI [77–79].

Based on known pathophysiology, only those with high-level injuries are at risk for B-AD and yet in some studies B-AD data were reported for all individuals [30, 38, 45, 46, 52], including those not at risk for B-AD based on lesion level. This may have led to underestimation of the true prevalence and severity of B-AD in those for whom it is a pertinent consideration.

There is little agreement on the best method for bowel emptying. In this review, data were not stratified by bowel care technique, and we did not aim to evaluate the effectiveness of care methodology but rather care impacts on QoL.

We were not able to complete an extensive meta-analysis due to the lack of common outcome measures, highlighting the need for future research to employ commonly used and established measurement tools to facilitate data aggregation and comparison between studies. When considering B-AD, while there is a standard definition for AD [80–82], there is opportunity in the literature to explicitly state the operational definition, assessment and quantification of AD and symptoms of AD used in each study.

Conclusions

Bowel dysfunction and bowel care challenges are prevalent and disabling for individuals with SCI, with a profoundly negative impact on QoL. Bowel dysfunction has detrimental impacts on physical health, emotional wellbeing, and social function that result in lower satisfaction with bowel routines. Priorities for bowel care routines should be to shorten time to complete, maximise independence, and reduce the risk of FI, constipation, and B-AD to improve QoL for those living with SCI.

Supplementary information

Supplemental File

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41393-024-01002-8.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to our community partner, Spinal Cord Injury British Columbia, for their insight and perspective, and critical review of the work. We are grateful to Dr. Brooke Hockin for her practical insight throughout the work. We would also like to thankfully acknowledge the provision of ICORD Seed Grant Funding to enable open access publishing of this work. 

Author contributions

EKSW, DGTW, and VEC designed the review protocol, and EKSW conducted the search. EKSW and RHYL screened potentially eligible studies, extracted and analysed data. DGTW provided guidance and insight that shaped the systematic review and meta-analysis approach. EKSW, RHYL, and VEC conducted article quality evaluation, generated summary tables and performed data visualisation and analysis. RHYL conducted meta-regression analyses. EKSW, RHYL, and VEC wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors were involved in interpreting and contextualising the results. Our knowledge partners RW and CBM provided critical feedback, insight, and context to the conclusions drawn in the study.

Data availability

All data were extracted from previously published works and are provided for the interested reader in the article figures and tables.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This systematic review is exempt from ethical approval.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

These authors contributed equally: Elin K. Sober-Williams, Rebekah H. Y. Lee.
==== Refs
References

1. Spinal Cord Injury Facts and Figures at a Glance [Internet]. Birmingham, AL; 2021 [cited 2021 Dec 16]. Available from: www.msktc.org/sci/model-system-centers.
2. Noonan VK Fingas M Farry A Baxter D Singh A Fehlings MG Incidence and prevalence of spinal cord injury in Canada: a national perspective Neuroepidemiology [Internet] 2012 38 219 26 10.1159/000336014 22555590
Noonan VK, Fingas M, Farry A, Baxter D, Singh A, Fehlings MG. et al. Incidence and prevalence of spinal cord injury in Canada: a national perspective. Neuroepidemiology [Internet]. 2012;38:219–26. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22555590/.22555590 10.1159/000336014
3. Inskip JA, Lucci VEM, McGrath MS, Willms R, Claydon VE. A Community Perspective on Bowel Management and Quality of Life after Spinal Cord Injury: The Influence of Autonomic Dysreflexia. J Neurotrauma [Internet]. 2018 May 1 [cited 2021 Sep 3];35:1091–105. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/29239268/.
4. Szymanski KM Cain MP Whittam B Kaefer M Rink RC Misseri R All Incontinence is Not Created Equal: Impact of Urinary and Fecal Incontinence on Quality of Life in Adults with Spina Bifida J Urol [Internet] 2017 197 885 91 10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.117 28131501
Szymanski KM, Cain MP, Whittam B, Kaefer M, Rink RC, Misseri R. All Incontinence is Not Created Equal: Impact of Urinary and Fecal Incontinence on Quality of Life in Adults with Spina Bifida. J Urol [Internet]. 2017;197:885–91. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28131501/.28131501 10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.117
5. Levi R Hultling C Nash MS Seiger A The Stockholm spinal cord injury study: 1. Medical problems in a regional SCI population Paraplegia [Internet] 1995 33 308 15 7644255
Levi R, Hultling C, Nash MS, Seiger A. The Stockholm spinal cord injury study: 1. Medical problems in a regional SCI population. Paraplegia [Internet]. 1995;33:308–15. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7644255/.7644255
6. Coggrave MJ Norton C Wilson-Barnett J Management of neurogenic bowel dysfunction in the community after spinal cord injury: a postal survey in the United Kingdom Spinal Cord [Internet] 2009 47 323 33 10.1038/sc.2008.137 19015665
Coggrave MJ, Norton C, Wilson-Barnett J. Management of neurogenic bowel dysfunction in the community after spinal cord injury: a postal survey in the United Kingdom. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2009;47:323–33. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19015665/.19015665 10.1038/sc.2008.137
7. Anderson KD Targeting recovery: priorities of the spinal cord-injured population J Neurotrauma [Internet] 2004 21 1371 83 10.1089/neu.2004.21.1371 15672628
Anderson KD. Targeting recovery: priorities of the spinal cord-injured population. J Neurotrauma [Internet]. 2004;21:1371–83. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/15672628/.15672628 10.1089/neu.2004.21.1371
8. Stiens SA Bergman SB Goetz LL Neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury: Clinical evaluation and rehabilitative management Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997 78 S86 102 10.1016/S0003-9993(97)90416-0 9084372
Stiens SA, Bergman SB, Goetz LL. Neurogenic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury: Clinical evaluation and rehabilitative management. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:S86–102.9084372 10.1016/S0003-9993(97)90416-0
9. Rajendran S Reiser J Bauman W Zhang R Gordon S Korsten M Gastrointestinal transit after spinal cord injury: effect of cisapride Am J Gastroenterol [Internet] 1992 87 1614 7 1442685
Rajendran S, Reiser J, Bauman W, Zhang R, Gordon S, Korsten M. Gastrointestinal transit after spinal cord injury: effect of cisapride. Am J Gastroenterol [Internet]. 1992;87:1614–7. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/1442685/.1442685
10. Hainsworth R, Claydon VE. Syncope and fainting. In: Autonomic failure. 5th ed. Oxford; 2012.
11. Cowan H Lakra C Desai M Autonomic dysreflexia in spinal cord injury BMJ [Internet] 2020 371 m3596 10.1136/bmj.m3596 33008797
Cowan H, Lakra C, Desai M. Autonomic dysreflexia in spinal cord injury. BMJ [Internet]. 2020;371:m3596 https://www-bmj-com.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/content/371/bmj.m3596.33008797 10.1136/bmj.m3596
12. Furusawa K Tokuhiro A Hugiyama A Ikeda A Tajima F Genda E Incidence of symptomatic autonomic dysreflexia varies according to the bowel and bladder management techniques in patients with spinal cord injury Spinal Cord [Internet] 2011 49 49 54 10.1038/sc.2010.94 20697419
Furusawa K, Tokuhiro A, Hugiyama A, Ikeda A, Tajima F, Genda E, et al. Incidence of symptomatic autonomic dysreflexia varies according to the bowel and bladder management techniques in patients with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2011;49:49–54. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20697419/.20697419 10.1038/sc.2010.94
13. West CR Squair JW McCracken L Currie KD Somvanshi R Yuen V Cardiac consequences of autonomic dysreflexia in spinal cord injury Hypertension [Internet] 2016 68 1281 9 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.116.07919 27698067
West CR, Squair JW, McCracken L, Currie KD, Somvanshi R, Yuen V, et al. Cardiac consequences of autonomic dysreflexia in spinal cord injury. Hypertension [Internet]. 2016;68:1281–9. https://www.ahajournals.org/.27698067 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.116.07919
14. Allen KJ, Leslie SW. Autonomic Dysreflexia: Complications. In: Autonomic Dysreflexia [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 23]. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/29494041/.
15. Wan D Krassioukov AV Life-threatening outcomes associated with autonomic dysreflexia: A clinical review J Spinal Cord Med [Internet] 2014 37 2 10.1179/2045772313Y.0000000098 24090418
Wan D, Krassioukov AV. Life-threatening outcomes associated with autonomic dysreflexia: A clinical review. J Spinal Cord Med [Internet]. 2014;37:2. Jan [cited 2022 Aug 23]Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC4066548/24090418 10.1179/2045772313Y.0000000098
16. Lucci VEM Harrison EL DeVeau KM Harman KA Squair JW Krassioukov A Markers of susceptibility to cardiac arrhythmia in experimental spinal cord injury and the impact of sympathetic stimulation and exercise training Auton Neurosci 2021 235 102867 10.1016/j.autneu.2021.102867 34399294
Lucci VEM, Harrison EL, DeVeau KM, Harman KA, Squair JW, Krassioukov A, et al. Markers of susceptibility to cardiac arrhythmia in experimental spinal cord injury and the impact of sympathetic stimulation and exercise training. Auton Neurosci. 2021;235:102867.34399294 10.1016/j.autneu.2021.102867
17. Shattock MJ Tipton MJ ‘Autonomic conflict’: a different way to die during cold water immersion? J Physiol [Internet] 2012 590 3219 30 10.1113/jphysiol.2012.229864 22547634
Shattock MJ, Tipton MJ. ‘Autonomic conflict’: a different way to die during cold water immersion? J Physiol [Internet]. 2012;590:3219–30. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/.22547634 10.1113/jphysiol.2012.229864
18. Hubli M Gee CM Krassioukov AV Refined assessment of blood pressure instability after spinal cord injury Am J Hypertens [Internet] 2015 28 173 81 10.1093/ajh/hpu122 24990527
Hubli M, Gee CM, Krassioukov AV. Refined assessment of blood pressure instability after spinal cord injury. Am J Hypertens [Internet]. 2015;28:173–81. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24990527/.24990527 10.1093/ajh/hpu122
19. Carlozzi NE Fyffe D Morin KG Byrne R Tulsky S Victorson D Impact of Blood Pressure Dysregulation on Health-Related Quality of Life in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury: Development of a Conceptual Model Phys Med Rehabil 2013 94 1721 30 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.02.024
Carlozzi NE, Fyffe D, Morin KG, Byrne R, Tulsky S, Victorson D, et al. Impact of Blood Pressure Dysregulation on Health-Related Quality of Life in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury: Development of a Conceptual Model. Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:1721–30.10.1016/j.apmr.2013.02.024
20. Stiens SA, Seattle W, Braunschweig C, Cowell JF Consortum for spinal cord medicine clinical practice guidelines, Neurogenic Bowel: What you should know, a guide for people with spinal cord injury [Internet]. 1999 [cited 2021 Sep 13]. Available from: http://www.pva.org.
21. Burns AS St-Germain D Connolly M Delparte JJ Guindon A Hitzig SL Phenomenological study of neurogenic bowel from the perspective of individuals living with spinal cord injury Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2015 96 49 55.e1 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.07.417 25172370
Burns AS, St-Germain D, Connolly M, Delparte JJ, Guindon A, Hitzig SL, et al. Phenomenological study of neurogenic bowel from the perspective of individuals living with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:49–55.e1.25172370 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.07.417
22. Johns JS, Krogh K, Ethans K, Chi J, Querée M, Eng JJ. Pharmacological Management of Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction after Spinal Cord Injury and Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Clinical Implications. J Clin Med [Internet]. 2021 Feb 2 [cited 2022 Aug 22];10:1–15. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33671492/.
23. Branagan G Tromans A Finnis D Effect of stoma formation on bowel care and quality of life in patients with spinal cord injury Spinal Cord 2003 41 680 3 10.1038/sj.sc.3101529 14639447
Branagan G, Tromans A, Finnis D. Effect of stoma formation on bowel care and quality of life in patients with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2003;41:680–3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14639447/.14639447 10.1038/sj.sc.3101529
24. Waddell O, McCombie A, Frizelle F. Colostomy and quality of life after spinal cord injury: systematic review. BJS open [Internet]. 2020 Dec 1 [cited 2022 Aug 22];4:1054–61. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32852897/.
25. Cumpston M Li T Page MJ Chandler J Welch VA Higgins JP Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Cochrane database Syst Rev [Internet] 2019 10 ED000142 31643080
Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane database Syst Rev [Internet]. 2019;10:ED000142 https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/31643080/.31643080
26. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ [Internet]. 2021 Mar 29 [cited 2022 Sep 7];372. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/33782057/.
27. Harrison R Jones B Gardner P Lawton R Correction to: Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multimethod studies (BMC Health Services Research BMC Health Serv Res 2021 21 1 20 10.1186/s12913-021-06122 33388053
Harrison R, Jones B, Gardner P, Lawton R. Correction to: Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multimethod studies (BMC Health Services Research. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:1–20. 10.1186/s12913-021-06122.33388053 10.1186/s12913-021-06122
28. Sirriyeh R Lawton R Gardner P Armitage G Reviewing studies with diverse designs: The development and evaluation of a new tool J Eval Clin Pract 2012 18 746 52 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01662.x 21410846
Sirriyeh R, Lawton R, Gardner P, Armitage G. Reviewing studies with diverse designs: The development and evaluation of a new tool. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012;18:746–52.21410846 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01662.x
29. Leduc BE Spacek E Lepage Y Colonic transit time after spinal cord injury: any clinical significance? J Spinal Cord Med [Internet] 2002 25 161 6 10.1080/10790268.2002.11753617 12214902
Leduc BE, Spacek E, Lepage Y. Colonic transit time after spinal cord injury: any clinical significance? J Spinal Cord Med [Internet]. 2002;25:161–6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12214902/.12214902 10.1080/10790268.2002.11753617
30. Pardee C Bricker D Rundquist J MacRae C Tebben C Characteristics of neurogenic bowel in spinal cord injury and perceived quality of life Rehabil Nurs [Internet] 2012 37 128 35 10.1002/RNJ.00024 22549630
Pardee C, Bricker D, Rundquist J, MacRae C, Tebben C. Characteristics of neurogenic bowel in spinal cord injury and perceived quality of life. Rehabil Nurs [Internet]. 2012;37:128–35. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22549630/.22549630 10.1002/RNJ.00024
31. Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol [Internet]. 2014 Dec 1 [cited 2022 Aug 22];14. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25524443/.
32. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: a User’s Manual Estimation of medical care total expenditures View project [Internet]. Health assessment Lab. Boston; 1994 Dec [cited 2022 Nov 24]. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292390260.
33. Larsen MK, Mikkelsen R, Budin SH, Lamberg DN, Thrysoe L, Borregaard B. With Fearful Eyes. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2022;Publish Ah(0):1–8.
34. Noonan VK Kopec JA Zhang H Dvorak MF Impact of Associated Conditions Resulting From Spinal Cord Injury on Health Status and Quality of Life in People With Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008 89 1074 82 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.10.041 18503802
Noonan VK, Kopec JA, Zhang H, Dvorak MF. Impact of Associated Conditions Resulting From Spinal Cord Injury on Health Status and Quality of Life in People With Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:1074–82.18503802 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.10.041
35. Craven C Hitzig SL Mittmann N Impact of impairment and secondary health conditions on health preference among Canadians with chronic spinal cord injury J Spinal Cord Med 2012 35 361 70 10.1179/2045772312Y.0000000046 23031173
Craven C, Hitzig SL, Mittmann N. Impact of impairment and secondary health conditions on health preference among Canadians with chronic spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2012;35:361–70.23031173 10.1179/2045772312Y.0000000046
36. Westgren N Levi R Quality of life and traumatic spinal cord injury Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998 79 1433 9 10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90240-4 9821906
Westgren N, Levi R. Quality of life and traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79:1433–9.9821906 10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90240-4
37. Jörgensen S Hedgren L Sundelin A Lexell J Global and domain-specific life satisfaction among older adults with long-term spinal cord injury J Spinal Cord Med [Internet] 2021 44 322 30 10.1080/10790268.2019.1610618 31099721
Jörgensen S, Hedgren L, Sundelin A, Lexell J. Global and domain-specific life satisfaction among older adults with long-term spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med [Internet]. 2021;44:322–30. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31099721/.31099721 10.1080/10790268.2019.1610618
38. Pires JM Ferreira AM Rocha F Andrade LG Campos I Margalho P Assessment of neurogenic bowel dysfunction impact after spinal cord injury using the international Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2018 54 873 9 29745625
Pires JM, Ferreira AM, Rocha F, Andrade LG, Campos I, Margalho P, et al. Assessment of neurogenic bowel dysfunction impact after spinal cord injury using the international Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2018;54:873–9.29745625
39. Gong D Wang Y Zhong L Jia M Liu T Li K Excretory dysfunction and quality of life after a spinal cord injury: A cross-sectional study J Clin Nurs 2021 30 1394 402 10.1111/jocn.15689 33528879
Gong D, Wang Y, Zhong L, Jia M, Liu T, Li K. Excretory dysfunction and quality of life after a spinal cord injury: A cross-sectional study. J Clin Nurs. 2021;30:1394–402.33528879 10.1111/jocn.15689
40. Koyuncu E Nakipoglu Yüzer GF Tasolglu Ö Kasap Z Özgirgin N Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction and its Effect on Quality of Life in Patients with Spinal Cord Injury J Pmr 2017 20 77 82
Koyuncu E, Nakipoglu Yüzer GF, Tasolglu Ö, Kasap Z, Özgirgin N. Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction and its Effect on Quality of Life in Patients with Spinal Cord Injury. J Pmr. 2017;20:77–82.
41. Krogh K Christensen P Sabroe S Laurberg S Neurogenic bowel dysfunction score Spinal Cord 2006 44 625 31 10.1038/sj.sc.3101887 16344850
Krogh K, Christensen P, Sabroe S, Laurberg S. Neurogenic bowel dysfunction score. Spinal Cord. 2006;44:625–31.16344850 10.1038/sj.sc.3101887
42. Liu CW Huang CC Yang YH Chen SC Weng MC Huang MH Relationship between neurogenic bowel dysfunction and health-related quality of life in persons with spinal cord injury J Rehabil Med 2009 41 35 40 10.2340/16501977-0277 19197567
Liu CW, Huang CC, Yang YH, Chen SC, Weng MC, Huang MH. Relationship between neurogenic bowel dysfunction and health-related quality of life in persons with spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:35–40.19197567 10.2340/16501977-0277
43. Erdem D Hava D Keskinoğlu P Bircan Ç Peker Ö Krogh K Reliability, validity and sensitivity to change of neurogenic bowel dysfunction score in patients with spinal cord injury Spinal Cord 2017 55 1084 7 10.1038/sc.2017.82 28695900
Erdem D, Hava D, Keskinoğlu P, Bircan Ç, Peker Ö, Krogh K, et al. Reliability, validity and sensitivity to change of neurogenic bowel dysfunction score in patients with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2017;55:1084–7.28695900 10.1038/sc.2017.82
44. Ture SD, Ozkaya G, Sivrioglu K. Relationship between neurogenic bowel dysfunction severity and functional status, depression, and quality of life in individuals with spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med [Internet]. 2022 Feb [cited 2022 Sep 19]; Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35108161/.
45. Kim JY Koh ES Leigh J Shin HI Management of bowel dysfunction in the community after spinal cord injury: A postal survey in the Republic of Korea Spinal Cord 2012 50 303 8 10.1038/sc.2011.124 22105460
Kim JY, Koh ES, Leigh J, Shin HI. Management of bowel dysfunction in the community after spinal cord injury: A postal survey in the Republic of Korea. Spinal Cord. 2012;50:303–8.22105460 10.1038/sc.2011.124
46. McCarthy S Wallwork S Soni BM Transanal irrigation with Peristeen in neurogenic bowel dysfunction: Audit of impact on symptoms and quality of life Gastrointest Nurs 2020 18 27 34 10.12968/gasn.2020.18.3.27
McCarthy S, Wallwork S, Soni BM. Transanal irrigation with Peristeen in neurogenic bowel dysfunction: Audit of impact on symptoms and quality of life. Gastrointest Nurs. 2020;18:27–34.10.12968/gasn.2020.18.3.27
47. Kannisto M Rintala R Bowel function in adults who have sustained spinal cord injury in childhood Paraplegia. 1995 33 701 3 8927408
Kannisto M, Rintala R. Bowel function in adults who have sustained spinal cord injury in childhood. Paraplegia. 1995;33:701–3.8927408
48. Elmelund M Klarskov N Biering-Sørensen F Fecal Incontinence and Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction in Women With Traumatic and Nontraumatic Spinal Cord Injury Dis Colon Rectum [Internet] 2019 62 1095 104 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001446 31318774
Elmelund M, Klarskov N, Biering-Sørensen F. Fecal Incontinence and Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction in Women With Traumatic and Nontraumatic Spinal Cord Injury. Dis Colon Rectum [Internet]. 2019;62:1095–104. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31318774/.31318774 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001446
49. Adriaansen JJE Ruijs LEM Van Koppenhagen CF Van Asbeck FWA Snoek GJ Van Kuppevelt D Secondary health conditions and quality of life in persons living with spinal cord injury for at least ten years J Rehabil Med 2016 48 853 60 10.2340/16501977-2166 27834436
Adriaansen JJE, Ruijs LEM, Van Koppenhagen CF, Van Asbeck FWA, Snoek GJ, Van Kuppevelt D, et al. Secondary health conditions and quality of life in persons living with spinal cord injury for at least ten years. J Rehabil Med. 2016;48:853–60.27834436 10.2340/16501977-2166
50. Jörgensen S Iwarsson S Lexell J Secondary Health Conditions, Activity Limitations, and Life Satisfaction in Older Adults With Long-Term Spinal Cord Injury PM R. 2017 9 356 66 10.1016/j.pmrj.2016.09.004 27647215
Jörgensen S, Iwarsson S, Lexell J. Secondary Health Conditions, Activity Limitations, and Life Satisfaction in Older Adults With Long-Term Spinal Cord Injury. PM R. 2017;9:356–66.27647215 10.1016/j.pmrj.2016.09.004
51. Hwang M Zebracki K Vogel LC Long-Term Outcomes and Longitudinal Changes of Neurogenic Bowel Management in Adults With Pediatric-Onset Spinal Cord Injury Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2017 98 241 8 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.07.004 27473299
Hwang M, Zebracki K, Vogel LC. Long-Term Outcomes and Longitudinal Changes of Neurogenic Bowel Management in Adults With Pediatric-Onset Spinal Cord Injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98:241–8.27473299 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.07.004
52. Krogh K Nielsen J Djurhuus JC Mosdal C Sabroe S Laurberg S Colorectal function in patients with spinal cord lesions Dis Colon Rectum 1997 40 1233 9 10.1007/BF02055170 9336119
Krogh K, Nielsen J, Djurhuus JC, Mosdal C, Sabroe S, Laurberg S. Colorectal function in patients with spinal cord lesions. Dis Colon Rectum. 1997;40:1233–9.9336119 10.1007/BF02055170
53. Locke JA Welk B Macnab A Rivers CS Kurban D Nigro M Exploring the relationship between self-reported urinary tract infections to quality of life and associated conditions: insights from the spinal cord injury Community Survey Spinal Cord [Internet] 2019 57 1040 7 10.1038/s41393-019-0323-z 31289367
Locke JA, Welk B, Macnab A, Rivers CS, Kurban D, Nigro M, et al. Exploring the relationship between self-reported urinary tract infections to quality of life and associated conditions: insights from the spinal cord injury Community Survey. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2019;57:1040–7. 10.1038/s41393-019-0323-z.31289367 10.1038/s41393-019-0323-z
54. Lombardi G Del Popolo G Cecconi F Surrenti E MacChiarella A Clinical outcome of sacral neuromodulation in incomplete spinal cord-injured patients suffering from neurogenic bowel dysfunctions . Spinal Cord 2010 48 154 9 10.1038/sc.2009.101 19668257
Lombardi G, Del Popolo G, Cecconi F, Surrenti E, MacChiarella A. Clinical outcome of sacral neuromodulation in incomplete spinal cord-injured patients suffering from neurogenic bowel dysfunctions. Spinal Cord. 2010;48:154–9.19668257 10.1038/sc.2009.101
55. Lynch AC Wong C Anthony A Dobbs BR Frizelle FA Bowel dysfunction following spinal cord injury: A description of bowel function in a spinal cord-injured population and comparison with age and gender matched controls Spinal Cord 2000 38 717 23 10.1038/sj.sc.3101058 11175370
Lynch AC, Wong C, Anthony A, Dobbs BR, Frizelle FA. Bowel dysfunction following spinal cord injury: A description of bowel function in a spinal cord-injured population and comparison with age and gender matched controls. Spinal Cord. 2000;38:717–23.11175370 10.1038/sj.sc.3101058
56. Mazor Y Jones M Andrews A Kellow JE Malcolm A Anorectal biofeedback for neurogenic bowel dysfunction in incomplete spinal cord injury . Spinal Cord 2016 54 1132 8 10.1038/sc.2016.67 27184916
Mazor Y, Jones M, Andrews A, Kellow JE, Malcolm A. Anorectal biofeedback for neurogenic bowel dysfunction in incomplete spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2016;54:1132–8.27184916 10.1038/sc.2016.67
57. van Doorn T, Groenendijk IM, Scheepe JR, Blok BFM. Neurogenic bowel dysfunction score in spinal cord-injured patients: translation and validation of the Dutch-language NBD score. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2022 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Sep 19];60:223–7. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34349233/.
58. Nielsen SD Faaborg PM Finnerup NB Christensen P Krogh K Ageing with neurogenic bowel dysfunction Spinal Cord [Internet] 2017 55 769 73 10.1038/sc.2017.22 28290468
Nielsen SD, Faaborg PM, Finnerup NB, Christensen P, Krogh K. Ageing with neurogenic bowel dysfunction. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2017;55:769–73. 10.1038/sc.2017.22.28290468 10.1038/sc.2017.22
59. Coggrave MJ Ingram RM Gardner BP Norton CS The impact of stoma for bowel management after spinal cord injury Spinal Cord [Internet] 2012 50 848 52 10.1038/sc.2012.66 22710944
Coggrave MJ, Ingram RM, Gardner BP, Norton CS. The impact of stoma for bowel management after spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2012;50:848–52. 10.1038/sc.2012.66.22710944 10.1038/sc.2012.66
60. Gorman PH Forrest GF Asselin PK Scott W Kornfeld S Hong E The Effect of Exoskeletal-Assisted Walking on Spinal Cord Injury Bowel Function: Results from a Randomized Trial and Comparison to Other Physical Interventions J Clin Med [Internet] 2021 10 1 11
Gorman PH, Forrest GF, Asselin PK, Scott W, Kornfeld S, Hong E, et al. The Effect of Exoskeletal-Assisted Walking on Spinal Cord Injury Bowel Function: Results from a Randomized Trial and Comparison to Other Physical Interventions. J Clin Med [Internet]. 2021;10:1–11. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33801165/.
61. Stoffel JT Barboglio-Romo P Lenherr SM Elliott SP O’Dell D Myers JB Factors impacting bowel symptoms in a contemporary spinal cord injury cohort: results from the Neurogenic Bladder Research Group Registry Spinal Cord [Internet] 2021 59 997 1002 10.1038/s41393-021-00667-9 34345004
Stoffel JT, Barboglio-Romo P, Lenherr SM, Elliott SP, O’Dell D, Myers JB, et al. Factors impacting bowel symptoms in a contemporary spinal cord injury cohort: results from the Neurogenic Bladder Research Group Registry. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2021;59:997–1002. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34345004/.34345004 10.1038/s41393-021-00667-9
62. Luther SL Nelson AL Harrow JJ Chen F Goetz LL A comparison of patient outcomes and quality of life in persons with neurogenic bowel: Standard bowel care program vs colostomy J Spinal Cord Med 2005 28 387 93 10.1080/10790268.2005.11753838 16869085
Luther SL, Nelson AL, Harrow JJ, Chen F, Goetz LL. A comparison of patient outcomes and quality of life in persons with neurogenic bowel: Standard bowel care program vs colostomy. J Spinal Cord Med. 2005;28:387–93.16869085 10.1080/10790268.2005.11753838
63. Nevedal A Kratz AL Tate DG Women’s experiences of living with neurogenic bladder and bowel after spinal cord injury: Life controlled by bladder and bowel Disabil Rehabil [Internet] 2016 38 573 81 10.3109/09638288.2015.1049378 26017362
Nevedal A, Kratz AL, Tate DG. Women’s experiences of living with neurogenic bladder and bowel after spinal cord injury: Life controlled by bladder and bowel. Disabil Rehabil [Internet]. 2016;38:573–81. 10.3109/09638288.2015.1049378. Available from26017362 10.3109/09638288.2015.1049378
64. Hicken BL Putzke JD Richards JS Bladder management and quality of life after spinal cord injury Am J Phys Med Rehabil [Internet] 2001 80 916 22 10.1097/00002060-200112000-00008 11821674
Hicken BL, Putzke JD, Richards JS. Bladder management and quality of life after spinal cord injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil [Internet]. 2001;80:916–22. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/11821674/.11821674 10.1097/00002060-200112000-00008
65. Smith PH Decter RM Antegrade continence enema procedure: Impact on quality of life in patients with spinal cord injury Spinal Cord 2015 53 213 5 10.1038/sc.2014.223 25535156
Smith PH, Decter RM. Antegrade continence enema procedure: Impact on quality of life in patients with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2015;53:213–5.25535156 10.1038/sc.2014.223
66. Lucci VEM, McKay RC, McBride CB, McGrath MS, Willms R, Gainforth HL, et al. Barriers and facilitators to changing bowel care practices after spinal cord injury: a Theoretical Domains Framework approach. 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 9];60:664–73. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34997189/.
67. Elliott SL Problems of sexual function after spinal cord injury Prog Brain Res 2006 152 387 99 10.1016/S0079-6123(05)52026-0 16198715
Elliott SL. Problems of sexual function after spinal cord injury. Prog Brain Res. 2006;152:387–99.16198715 10.1016/S0079-6123(05)52026-0
68. Riera CE Dillin A Emerging Role of Sensory Perception in Aging and Metabolism Trends Endocrinol Metab [Internet] 2016 27 294 303 10.1016/j.tem.2016.03.007 27067041
Riera CE, Dillin A. Emerging Role of Sensory Perception in Aging and Metabolism. Trends Endocrinol Metab [Internet]. 2016;27:294–303. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27067041/.27067041 10.1016/j.tem.2016.03.007
69. Cooper EA Bonne Lee B Muhlmann M Outcomes following stoma formation in patients with spinal cord injury Color Dis 2019 21 1415 20 10.1111/codi.14753
Cooper EA, Bonne Lee B, Muhlmann M. Outcomes following stoma formation in patients with spinal cord injury. Color Dis. 2019;21:1415–20.10.1111/codi.14753
70. Lucci VEM McGrath MS Inskip JA Sarveswaran S Willms R Claydon VE Clinical recommendations for use of lidocaine lubricant during bowel care after spinal cord injury prolong care routines and worsen autonomic dysreflexia: results from a randomised clinical trial Spinal Cord [Internet] 2020 58 430 40 10.1038/s41393-019-0381-2 31767947
Lucci VEM, McGrath MS, Inskip JA, Sarveswaran S, Willms R, Claydon VE. Clinical recommendations for use of lidocaine lubricant during bowel care after spinal cord injury prolong care routines and worsen autonomic dysreflexia: results from a randomised clinical trial. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2020;58:430–40. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/31767947/.31767947 10.1038/s41393-019-0381-2
71. Spinal Cord Injury British Columbia. Fee to Pee: Research Highlights Catheter Costs and Inequity. The Spin Magazine [Internet]. 2022 Jun;12–5. Available from: https://sci-bc.ca/fee-to-pee-research-highlights-catheter-costs/.
72. Sprigle S Sonenblum S Assessing evidence supporting redistribution of pressure for pressure ulcer prevention: a review J Rehabil Res Dev [Internet] 2011 48 203 13 10.1682/JRRD.2010.05.0102 21480095
Sprigle S, Sonenblum S. Assessing evidence supporting redistribution of pressure for pressure ulcer prevention: a review. J Rehabil Res Dev [Internet]. 2011;48:203–13. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21480095/.21480095 10.1682/JRRD.2010.05.0102
73. Griffin D. The Precious Commodity of Time: Taking a Second Look at the Effects of Paralysis | HuffPost Impact [Internet]. Huffpost. 2014 [cited 2022 Aug 13]. Available from: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-precious-commodity-of_b_5791132.
74. Sweet SN Noreau L Leblond J Martin Ginis KA Peer support need fulfillment among adults with spinal cord injury: relationships with participation, life satisfaction and individual characteristics Disabil Rehabil [Internet] 2016 38 558 65 10.3109/09638288.2015.1049376 26017541
Sweet SN, Noreau L, Leblond J, Martin Ginis KA. Peer support need fulfillment among adults with spinal cord injury: relationships with participation, life satisfaction and individual characteristics. Disabil Rehabil [Internet]. 2016;38:558–65. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26017541/.26017541 10.3109/09638288.2015.1049376
75. Hoffmann DD Sundby J Biering-Sørensen F Kasch H Implementing volunteer peer mentoring as a supplement to professional efforts in primary rehabilitation of persons with spinal cord injury Spinal Cord [Internet] 2019 57 881 10.1038/s41393-019-0294-0 31123334
Hoffmann DD, Sundby J, Biering-Sørensen F, Kasch H. Implementing volunteer peer mentoring as a supplement to professional efforts in primary rehabilitation of persons with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2019;57:881. Oct 1 [cited 2022 Aug 25]Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC6892415/31123334 10.1038/s41393-019-0294-0
76. Gainforth HL Hoekstra F McKay R McBride CB Sweet SN Martin Ginis KA Integrated Knowledge Translation Guiding Principles for Conducting and Disseminating Spinal Cord Injury Research in Partnership Arch Phys Med Rehabil [Internet] 2021 102 656 63 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.09.393 33129763
Gainforth HL, Hoekstra F, McKay R, McBride CB, Sweet SN, Martin Ginis KA, et al. Integrated Knowledge Translation Guiding Principles for Conducting and Disseminating Spinal Cord Injury Research in Partnership. Arch Phys Med Rehabil [Internet]. 2021;102:656–63. 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.09.393. Available from33129763 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.09.393
77. Lundström U Wahman K Seiger Gray DB Isaksson G Lilja M Participation in activities and secondary health complications among persons aging with traumatic spinal cord injury Spinal Cord [Internet] 2017 55 367 72 10.1038/sc.2016.153 27845357
Lundström U, Wahman K, Seiger, Gray DB, Isaksson G, Lilja M. Participation in activities and secondary health complications among persons aging with traumatic spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 2017;55:367–72. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/27845357/.27845357 10.1038/sc.2016.153
78. Adriaansen JJE Van Asbeck FWA Lindeman E Van Der Woude LHV De Groot S Post MWM Secondary health conditions in persons with a spinal cord injury for at least 10 years: design of a comprehensive long-term cross-sectional study Disabil Rehabil [Internet] 2013 35 1104 10 10.3109/09638288.2012.712196 22991949
Adriaansen JJE, Van Asbeck FWA, Lindeman E, Van Der Woude LHV, De Groot S, Post MWM. Secondary health conditions in persons with a spinal cord injury for at least 10 years: design of a comprehensive long-term cross-sectional study. Disabil Rehabil [Internet]. 2013;35:1104–10. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/22991949/.22991949 10.3109/09638288.2012.712196
79. Hitzig SL Tonack M Campbell KA McGillivray CF Boschen KA Richards K Secondary health complications in an aging Canadian spinal cord injury sample Am J Phys Med Rehabil [Internet] 2008 87 545 55 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31817c16d6 18574346
Hitzig SL, Tonack M, Campbell KA, McGillivray CF, Boschen KA, Richards K, et al. Secondary health complications in an aging Canadian spinal cord injury sample. Am J Phys Med Rehabil [Internet]. 2008;87:545–55. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/18574346/.18574346 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31817c16d6
80. Acute Management Of Autonomic Dysreflexia. Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury Presenting to Health-Care Facilities J Spinal Cord Med 2002 25 S68 88 10.1080/10790268.2002.11753642
Acute Management Of Autonomic Dysreflexia. Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury Presenting to Health-Care Facilities. J Spinal Cord Med. 2002;25:S68–88. sup110.1080/10790268.2002.11753642
81. Karlsson AK Autonomic dysreflexia Spinal Cord [Internet] 1999 37 383 91 10.1038/sj.sc.3100867 10432257
Karlsson AK. Autonomic dysreflexia. Spinal Cord [Internet]. 1999;37:383–91. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10432257/.10432257 10.1038/sj.sc.3100867
82. Wecht JM, Krassioukov AV, Alexander M, Handrakis JP, McKenna SL, Kennelly M, et al. International Standards to document Autonomic Function following SCI (ISAFSCI): Second Edition. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil [Internet]. 2021 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Aug 25];27:23. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC8152176/
