## 3 Results
### Clinical-Functional Status  
Regarding the functional status, we analyzed the evolution of the fall risk, VAS, FIMm, FIMc, and FIMt at admission and discharge.  
We found statistically significant differences between the median values of each variable across categories of etiology (T-SCI/NT-SCI): \(p<0.001<\alpha=0.05\) (Independent Samples Median test), and we also found that the distribution of scores for each variable was not the same across categories of etiology (T-SCI/NT-SCI): \(p<0.001<\alpha=0.05\) (Independent Samples Mann-Whitney U test), separately at admission and at discharge. So, comparing the two groups from the point of view of the clinical-functional parameters analyzed in the dynamics, we note that patients with traumatic lesions and nontraumatic lesions showed a significant increase of FIMm, FIMc, and FIMtm, FIMc, and FIMt (\(p<0.05\)). Moreover, the decrease in fall risk and VAS were statistically significant in both groups after 10 days of treatment (\(p<0.05\)).  
In the following, for each clinical-functional variable (Table 2), we will detail the evolution, specifying for each: minimum (min), maximum (max), mean, median, and IQR.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **T-SCI (N = 65)** & **NT-SCI (N = 77)** \\ \hline
**Age at admission** & & \\
18–30 & 8 (12.3\%) & 6 (7.8\%) \\
30–50 & 25 (38.5\%) & 21 (27.3\%) \\
50–90 & 32 (49.2\%) & 50 (64.9\%) \\
**Sex** & & \\ Male & 49 (75.4\%) & 40 (51.9\%) \\ Female & 16 (24.6\%) & 37 (48.1\%) \\
**Occupation** & & \\ Unemployed & 1 (1.5\%) & 2 (2.6\%) \\ Employed & 8 (12.3\%) & 17 (22.1\%) \\ Retired & 34 (52.3\%) & 38 (49.4\%) \\ Disability Certificate & 22 (33.8\%) & 20 (26.0\%) \\
**Environment** & & \\ Urban & 23 (35.4\%) & 19 (24.7\%) \\ Rural & 42 (64.6\%) & 58 (75.3\%) \\
**Medication** & & \\ No medication & 26 (40.00\%) & 22 (28.57\%) \\ Antispasmodics & 23 (35.38\%) & 10 (12.99\%) \\ Antihypertenseive & 18 (27.69\%) & 36 (46.75\%) \\ Lipid-Lowering Drugs & 3 (4.62\%) & 7 (9.09\%) \\ NSAID & 2 (3.08\%) & 3 (3.09\%) \\ Pain relievers & 3 (4.62\%) & 0 (0.00\%) \\ Myorelaxants & 8 (12.31\%) & 6 (7.79\%) \\ Food supplements & 16 (24.62\%) & 11 (14.29\%) \\ Antidiabetics drugs & 2 (3.08\%) & 2 (2.60\%) \\ Psychiatric medication & 2 (3.08\%) & 3 (3.90\%) \\ Anticonvulsants & 4 (6.15\%) & 5 (6.49\%) \\
**Carmeli Score** & & \\ Mean \(\pm\) SD & 1.78 \(\pm\) 0.52 & 1.68 \(\pm\) 0.64 \\ Median & 2.00 & 2.00 \\ Range & 1.00 & 1.00 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Abbreviations: T-SCI: traumatic spinal cord injury; NT-SCI: nontraumatic spinal cord injury; NSAID: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; SD: standard deviation.  
\end{table}
Table 1: Patients characteristics.  
In the traumatic group, we analyzed the values of the FIMm scores (Figure 4) at admission and at discharge. In the nontraumatic group, the value of FIMm at admission increased at discharge. We also analyzed the FIMc (Figure 5) at admission and discharge and the results were comparable, with an increase in both groups. The comparison of the admission FIMt scores (Figure 6) between the two groups revealed that the traumatic SCI group had lower scores than the nontraumatic SCI group. Both values, the FIMt scores for T-SCI and FIMt scores for NT-SCI, increased at discharge, which were statistically significant (\(p<0.05\)).