ArticleFujita medical journal2021
Subjective assessment of effectiveness, quality of life, and psychological status of patients receiving botulinum toxin therapy for hemifacial spasm, blepharospasm, or cervical dystonia.
Article in Fujita medical journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychological and motor outcomes of botulinum toxin in hemifacial spasm and blepharospasm.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Sustained anxiolytic and antidepressant effects of botulinum toxin A in blepharospasm patients beyond motor symptom control.World journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Prevalence and treatment effects on non-motor symptoms in cervical dystonia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders · 2026Review
- Assessment of quality of life in patients with cervical dystonia and hemifacial spasm after botulinum toxin injections.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2025Article
- Depressive symptoms and quality of life in patients with benign essential blepharospasm under long-term therapy with botulinum toxin.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2025Article
- Individual Response to Botulinum Toxin Therapy in Movement Disorders: A Time Series Analysis Approach.Toxins · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEvaluations of subjective effectiveness, quality of life (QOL), and mental status of patients receiving treatment with botulinum toxin (BTX) for hemifacial spasm (FS), blepharospasm (BS), and cervical dystonia (CD) were conducted using a self-administered questionnaire.
methodsEighty-eight patients who received BTX treatment in the stable stage were analyzed. A numerical rating scale was used to assess treatment effectiveness, home QOL, and social QOL. Anxiety and depression were examined using the hospital anxiety and depression scale.
resultsIn men, the treatment effectiveness was 2.1±1.0 for FS patients, 2.8±0.5 for BS patients, and 4.0±2.0 for CD patients, which indicates that FS was more effectively treated than CD. QOL scores were higher and anxiety and depression scores were lower in FS patients than BS and CD patients. Overall, social QOL scores were lower than home QOL. A high prevalence ratio of depression was found in BS and CD patients.
conclusionsCD responded less effectively to BTX compared with FS and BS. Additionally, FS and BS patients exhibited similar treatment effects. All of these disorders affect the patient's appearance, which can reduce self-esteem and social QOL and potentially cause anxiety and depression. BS and CD patients exhibited a higher prevalence of depression than FS patients, which indicates a relationship with the underlying mechanisms of dystonia. Asking patients about subjective effectiveness, QOL, and psychiatric status can help staff respond to patient issues.
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.