ReviewDegenerative neurological and neuromuscular disease2012
Optimal management for people with severe spasticity.
Review in Degenerative neurological and neuromuscular disease, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of the Structured Water Dance Intervention (SWAN) on muscular hypertonia in adults with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Ultrasound-Guided Alcohol Neurolysis for Poststroke Upper Limb Spasticity to Facilitate Arteriovenous Fistula Creation in Hemodialysis: A Case Report.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2026Article
- The Benefits of Advanced Botulinum Neurotoxin Injection Training from a Spasticity Management Fellowship.Toxins · 2026Article
- Lumbar epidural steroid injection for spasticity in paraplegic spinal cord injury: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2024Article
- Management of Spasticity After Traumatic Brain Injury in Children.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spasticity is characterized by velocity-dependent increase in tonic stretch reflexes and tendon jerks. Many people affected by spasticity receive late treatment, or no treatment, which greatly reduces the potential to regain full motor control and restore function. There is much to consider before determining treatment for people with spasticity. Treatment of pediatric patients increases the complexity, because of the substantial difference between adult and pediatric spasticity. Proper patient evaluation, utilization of scales and measures, and obtaining patient and caregiver history is vital in determining optimal spasticity treatment. Further, taking into consideration the limitations and desires of individuals serve as a guide to best management. We have grouped contributing factors into the IDAHO Criteria to elucidate a multidisciplinary approach, which considers a person's complete field of experience. This model is applied to goal setting, and recognizes the importance of a spasticity management team, comprising the treatment subject, his/her family, the environment, and a supportive, well-informed medical staff. The criteria take into account the complexity associated with diagnosing and treating spasticity, with the ultimate goal of improved function.
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.