Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40326554›Full record

ArticleEFORT open reviews2025

Current techniques for the treatment of spasticity and their effectiveness.

Hong-Xiao Li, Ke Xu, Shan-Lin Chen, Shu-Feng Wang, Wen-Jun Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFORT open reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Effectiveness of TZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

5 authors.

Hong-Xiao Li
Ke Xu
Shan-Lin Chen
Shu-Feng Wang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review highlights the role of existing spasticity treatment methods in reducing muscle tone and improving function. The surgical methods today mainly include selective dorsal rhizotomy, selective neurotomy, intrathecal baclofen treatment (ITB), etc. These techniques (except ITB) can lower patients' muscular tone in the long term and improve function to some extent. The young procedures, contralateral C7 nerve transfer and T1 neurotomy, are still under research. ITB and nonsurgical treatment methods, botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A) and extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT), can reduce muscle tone in the short term, but the long-term efficacy is unsatisfactory. In addition, the effects of improving function are relatively controversial. The economic cost of these treatment methods is also heavy for patients. In addition, some studies have reported that some kinds of electrical/magnetic stimulation can improve the patients' function. They can potentially be used as an adjunctive treatment for spasticity. According to current studies and our own experience, surgery methods (except ITB) are still recommended for patients, whose spasticity has a major detrimental influence on their everyday lives, taking into account patient benefits and cost-effectiveness. There are also some problems in the current research on spasticity treatment, such as incomplete guidelines and a relative lack of high-quality studies, which is what the doctors need to strive for. Further exploration is needed to find the treatment methods that can reduce muscle tone while improving patients' function to better benefit patients.

Indexed as

botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A)contralateral C7 nerve transferextracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT)intrathecal baclofen (ITB)selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR)selective neurotomyspasticity

Identifiers

PMID40326554
PMCPMC12061021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.