Reply to comment on coronary artery disease and hypertension in a non-selected spinal cord injury patient population (letter to the Editor)

This letter is a response to a comment criticizing the methodology of a study on coronary artery disease (CAD) and hypertension in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). The authors defend their study's use of medical record reviews and patient interviews, arguing that the data obtained are reliable and clinically meaningful. The authors argue that clinically meaningful data should relate to medical problems that cause morbidity, disability, or death. They challenge the critics' assertion that hidden CAD in SCI patients leads to higher rates of these outcomes compared to the general population. The authors express confidence in the evaluation and care provided in specialized SCI units, suggesting it is at least as reliable as data collected from the general population regarding CAD and hypertension.

• 1
  The authors assert that their data are of the highest reliability achievable retrospectively and are suitable for comparison with data on the general population.
• 2
  The authors argue that there is no evidence that SCI patients with hidden CAD experience more morbidity, disability, or death than asymptomatic individuals in the general population.
• 3
  The authors defend the reliability of hypertension documentation in SCI units compared to self-reported data in the general population.