ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2018
Impact of fampridine on quality of life: clinical benefit in real-world practice.
Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sleep Deprivation-Induced Anxiety Alleviated by Oral Administration of 4-Aminopyridine in Male Mice.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Performance Measures and Plasma Biomarker Levels in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis after 14 Days of Fampridine Treatment: An Explorative Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Translation and validation of the multiple sclerosis walking scale 12 for the German population - the MSWS-12/D.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
- Novel Analgesics with Peripheral Targets.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the effectiveness and tolerability of fampridine in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) in real clinical practice and to analyse adherence to treatment and general satisfaction of patients in terms of quality of life (QOL).
methodsPatients who started treatment with fampridine from May 2014 to October 2014 were included. Primary and secondary outcomes were Timed 25-Foot Walk (T25FW) and MS Walking Scale-12 (MSWS-12) respectively, measured at baseline and 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months. Adherence was measured by the Morisky-Green questionnaire, patient satisfaction with a visual analogue scale (VAS) and QOL with improvement in mobility, self-care, daily activities, pain/discomfort or anxiety/depression.
results30 patients (46.7% women) of mean age 39 years, mean MS duration 13.7 years, mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score 5.8, 57% with relapsing-remitting MS were included. 22 patients (73%) continued to take treatment throughout the study period. Two weeks after treatment initiation all measures improved significantly from baseline (T25FW: -7.5 s, p<0.05; MSWS-12: -36.7, p<0.05). At 6 months, walking speed and self-perceived walking ability were significantly improved (T25FW: -3.8 s, p<0.05; MSWS-12: -30.0, p<0.05). Adverse events were reported by 30% of patients. Seizures were registered in one patient. 70% of patients were adherent with treatment. Median (IQR) general satisfaction VAS score was 8 (7-9). Patients reported an improvement in mobility (70%), anxiety/depression (33.3%), self-care (23.3%), daily activities (23.3%) and pain/discomfort (3.3%).
conclusionsFampridine is effective and safe in patients with MS in real clinical practice up to 6 months. Adherence to treatment was suboptimal but patients' general satisfaction was high and fampridine improved several items of QOL.
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.