Observational studyDer Nervenarzt2021
[Treatment satisfaction in patients with cervical dystonia : Subgroup analysis of INTEREST-IN-CD-2].
Observational study in Der Nervenarzt, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEven though treatment guidelines recommend botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) as first line treatment for primary cervical dystonia (CD), there are only limited data on how BoNT-A-injections are administered in routine clinical practice.
objectiveThis subgroup analysis evaluated patient satisfaction and symptom control under consideration of BoNT‑A treatment modalities in German and Austrian CD patients (DE/AT, n = 79) compared to the full international cohort (n = 995). MATERIAL AND
methodsThe INTEREST-IN-CD2 was a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational study. Course of treatment in adult primary CD patients under BoNT‑A treatment was assessed over a time period of 3 years. Primary outcome measure was the long-term satisfaction of patients with treatment, measured as maximum satisfaction between two consecutive injections as well as satisfaction at the time of reinjection.
resultsTreatment satisfaction at the maximum effect was stable and comparably good in both populations during the study (82.3-92.7% and 85.0-89.9%). Satisfaction decreased with decreasing BoNT‑A effect at the end of the treatment interval: it was comparable at the start of the study in both groups (54.2% vs. 51.4%), decreased numerically in the DE/AT group to 32.7% but remained stable in the total population. Analysis of Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) and Tsui scores did not reveal any substantial differences between the DE/AT subgroup and total cohort.
conclusionOverall, the study confirmed good clinical symptom control by BoNT‑A. The numerical differences in the current satisfaction seen in the comparison of DE/AT to the total cohort are possibly due to different proportions of BoNT‑A naïve patients in both groups, as they expressed different levels of satisfaction than previously treated patients.
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.