Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39838596›Full record

Trial reportMovement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society2025

Essential Tremor Suppression with a Novel Anti-Tremor Orthosis: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Winfred Mugge, Liset E M Elstgeest, Milan van Ginkel, Lucas Pol, IJsbrand de Lange, Nicola Pambakian, Alvaro Assis de Souza, Rick C Helmich, Daan J Kamphuis

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Winfred MuggeFaculty of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6071-6401
Liset E M ElstgeestReinier de Graaf Hospital, Reinier Academy, Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6283-4719
Milan van GinkelDepartment of Neurology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands.
Lucas PolDepartment of Neurology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands.
IJsbrand de LangeDepartment of Research and Development, STIL B.V, Delft, The Netherlands.
Nicola PambakianDepartment of Research and Development, STIL B.V, Delft, The Netherlands.
Alvaro Assis de SouzaDepartment of Research and Development, STIL B.V, Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0340-3162
Rick C HelmichDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Centre of Expertise for Parkinson and Movement Disorders, Department of Neurology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4035-6573
Daan J KamphuisDepartment of Neurology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7016-6597

Funding

Brain Foundation Netherlands
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEssential tremor (ET) is characterized by action tremor of the arms, which can interfere substantially with daily activities. Pharmacotherapy may be ineffective or associated with side effects, and stereotactic surgery is invasive. Hence, new accessible treatment options are urgently needed. An easy-to-use and lightweight orthotic device that exerts joint damping may provide an alternative solution for reducing tremor in daily activities.

objectiveOur goal was to assess the efficacy of a novel anti-tremor orthosis (STIL) in reducing clinical and accelerometry measures of distal arm tremor in ET.

methodsIn a randomized crossover single-blinded trial in 24 ET patients in a hospital setting, we compared three conditions: no orthosis (baseline), a sham device, and the anti-tremor orthosis (order randomized). The orthosis, but not the sham device, passively damped joints in the forearm. Participants performed seven tasks from the Tremor Research Group Essential Tremor Rating Scale (TETRAS). The two co-primary outcome measures were: clinical tremor severity (video-scored TETRAS) and tremor power (accelerometry). Patient satisfaction was self-assessed using the Dutch Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology. Conditions were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.

resultsThe anti-tremor orthosis significantly reduced TETRAS scores compared to sham and baseline (baseline: 19.0 ± 3.2, sham: 13.7 ± 3.9, orthosis: 9.9 ± 3.6; mean ± standard deviation). Similar effects were observed for tremor power, which was reduced by 87.4% (orthosis vs. baseline) and 59.5% (orthosis vs. sham) across all tasks. A total of 71% of participants were (very) satisfied and 12.5% reported minor adverse events (discomfort/redness of skin).

conclusionThe anti-tremor orthosis had a clinically relevant tremor-reducing effect in ET in a controlled setting, offering potential for a new treatment to manage ET in daily activities. © 2025 The Author(s). Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Indexed as

Essential TremorOrthotic DevicesAccelerometryAgedCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionSeverity of Illness IndexSingle-Blind MethodTreatment Outcomeanti‐tremorbiomechanical loadingclinical investigationessential tremormechanical joint dampingmedical devicenon‐invasive deviceorthosistreatmenttremor reductiontremor suppression

Identifiers

PMID39838596
PMCPMC11926495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.