Trial reportJournal of neurology2018
Personalized botulinum toxin type A therapy for cervical dystonia based on kinematic guidance.
Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- EMG versus US: a randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy in guiding botulinum toxin treatment in cervical dystonia.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2025Trial
- Review
- Article
- Conversion to AbobotulinumtoxinA Increases Waning Time and Efficacy for Cervical Dystonia.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2023Article
- Hold that pose: capturing cervical dystonia's head deviation severity from video.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022Article
- Article
- New modalities and directions for dystonia care.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2021Review
- Botulinum Toxin in Movement Disorders: An Update.Toxins · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBotulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) injections is the accepted first-line therapy for cervical dystonia (CD), however, numerous patients discontinue treatment early due to perceived sub-optimal relief. To improve BoNT-A therapy for CD, proper assessment of neck motion and selection of relevant muscles and dosing must be met. Kinematic technology may improve treatment outcomes by guiding physicians to better tailor muscle selection and BoNT-A dosing for CD therapy.
methods28 CD participants were placed into either group: expert injector determined injection patterns by visual assessment ("vb") versus injection patterns based on kinematics interpreted by an expert injector ("kb"). Injections occurred at weeks 0, 16 and 32 with follow-ups at weeks 6, 22 and 38. Kinematics utilized four sensors to capture the severity of multiaxial, static neck posturing (e.g., torticollis) and dynamic, spasmodic/tremor movements while participants were seated. Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) score changes were evaluated over 38 weeks.
resultsFor the "kb" participants, there was a significant 28.8% (- 11.25 points) reduction in TWSTRS total score at week 6, as well as significant reduction in severity and disability TWSTRS sub-scores (parts I and II) with maintained improvement at subsequent visits. As for the "vb" participants had a significant reduction in total TWSTRS score by 28.5% (- 9.84 points) after week 22. Disability score for the "vb" group trended towards improvement over 38 weeks.
conclusionClinical judgement guided by kinematic analysis of CD biomechanics can result in faster optimal muscle selections and minimize use of higher BoNT-A doses as compared to visual determination, thereby achieving comparable and potentially better treatment outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.