• Kirshblum SC, Memmo P, Kim N, Campagnolo D and Millis S (2002). Comparison of the Revised 2000 American Spinal Injury Association Classification Standards with the 1996 Guidelines. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 81 (7): 502-505. Summary: Kirshblum SC, Memmo P, Kim N, Campagnolo D, Millis S: Comparison of the revised 2000 American Spinal Injury Association Classification Standards with the 1996 guidelines. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2002;81:502-505.OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to determine the level of agreement between the most recent change in the American Spinal Injury Association International Standards (2000) and the previous (1996) classification. DESIGN: In a spinal cord injury rehabilitation hospital, data were collected on 94 subjects who had an initial neurologic examination according to the International Standards within 1 wk of injury and again at 1 yr. Comparisons were examined of the level of agreement between the 1996 and 2000 revisions in classification of the motor incomplete levels and ability to prognosticate outcome at 1 yr on the basis of the initial examination. RESULTS: Near perfect agreement between the 1996 and 2000 revised guidelines in the classification of motor incomplete injuries was found, with no statistically significant difference for prognosticating neurologic recovery at 1 yr on the basis of the initial examination. CONCLUSION: The 2000 revisions do not offer a significant difference in American Spinal Injury Association impairment classification or in predicting neurologic recovery at 1 yr. Spinal Cord Injury and Ventilator Dependent Programs, Kessler Institute for Rehabilitation (SCK), the Kessler Medical Rehabilitation and Research Education Corporation (SM), West Orange, New Jersey; and the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Medicine and Dentistry/New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey (PM, NK, DC).