ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2026
Patient-reported effects of transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation on spasticity in patients with spinal cord injury.
Article in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in the diagnosis and management of post-stroke limb spasticity: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurologyReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAssess pateint-reported effects of transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) on spasticity after multiple treatment.
designAn uncontrolled prospective case series study.
settingA rehabilitation hospital.
participantsA convenience sample of hospitalized adults with spinal cord injury (SCI) and lower-body spasticity limiting physical function and/or reducing quality of life (i.e. pain, sleep disturbance).
interventionsParticipants received 30 minutes of tSCS (continuous, asymmetrical, biphasic rectangular impulses, 100 Hz) applied for 3-6 consecutive days using NeuroTrac multiTENS® (http://quintet.no). Two electrodes were placed paravertebrally at Th11-Th12 level and two on lower abdomen. OUTCOME MEASURES: Penn`s Spasm Frequency and Severity Scales were used for quantifying spasticity, Numeric Rating Scales (NRS 0-10) for perceived impact of spasticity on one chosen activity of a daily living, sleep-disturbance, and pain in trunk/lower limbs due to spasticity. The outcome measures were completed through interviews conducted before the first treatment, and immediately after the last treatment.
resultsSeventeen people participated; injury levels C6-T12, AIS A-D, and mean age 51 years (SD 14). Fourteen participants reported a clinical important improvement in ADL performance, sleep disturbance and/or a decrease in pain due to spasticity (≥ two points on NRS). Minimal change was reported on Penn`s Spasm frequency and Severity Scales. No adverse events were observed.
conclusionsThe majority of the participants perceived clinically relevant improvements on at least one patient-reported outcome measure, and no adverse events were reported. This is a simple and a non-invasive treatment that may have a potential of reducing the troublesome effects of spasticity.
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.