Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40841952›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025

Dose-response effectiveness of focused shockwave therapy on ultrasonographic muscular properties in patients with stroke exhibiting ankle spasticity.

Shu-Mei Yang, Hung-Hsi Lin, Yen-Hua Chen, You-Lin Lu, Chueh-Hung Wu, Wen-Shiang Chen, Meng-Ting Lin

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors.

Shu-Mei YangDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hung-Hsi LinDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Yen-Hua ChenDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
You-Lin LuDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Chueh-Hung WuDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Wen-Shiang ChenDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Meng-Ting LinDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, National Taiwan University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. b96401093@ntu.edu.tw.

Funding

National Science and Technology Council NSTC114-2314-B002-130-MY3National Taiwan University Hospital NTUH 114-X0009National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch 112-HCH050,113-BIH030
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPost-stroke spasticity (PSS) in the ankle plantar flexors leads to abnormal gait, increased energy expenditure, and a higher risk of falls. Ultrasonographic measures, such as muscle fascicle length (MFL) and pennation angle (PA), provide insight into muscle changes associated with spasticity. This study aimed to investigate the dose-dependent effects of focused extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) on ultrasonographic muscle properties and clinical outcomes in patients with PSS of the ankle plantar flexors.

methodsThis post hoc analysis was based on a double-blind, randomized controlled trial investigating different ESWT doses for post-stroke ankle spasticity treatment. A total of 39 patients with PSS of the ankle plantar flexors were randomized into two groups: the double-dose ESWT group received 4,000 focused shockwave pulses per session, while the control ESWT group received 2,000 pulses per session. Both groups received four ESWT sessions over a two-week intervention period, followed by a 24-week follow-up period for outcome assessments. Outcome measures included ultrasonographic assessments of MFL, PA, and strain elastography, as well as clinical evaluations using the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), Modified Tardieu Scale (MTS), passive range of motion (PROM), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and Barthel Index at baseline, and at 1, 4, 12, and 24 weeks post-treatment.

resultsNo significant within-group changes in PA or MFL were observed for either ESWT group over the 24-week period. Generalized estimation equation analysis showed no significant group effects on PA, MFL, or strain elastography. However, when analyzing all participants, a significant time-related improvement in MFL was identified. In the double-dose ESWT group, MFL was significantly correlated with MTS, PROM, and TUG test, while PA was significantly correlated with MAS. Given that this was a post hoc analysis, these results should be interpreted conservatively.

conclusionsWhile PA and MFL did not show significant differences between groups, the double-dose ESWT group exhibited improved clinical outcomes linked to MFL. These findings suggest that increased ESWT dosage may enhance muscle architecture and function in stroke rehabilitation.

Indexed as

AnkleExtracorporeal Shockwave TherapyMuscle, SkeletalMuscle SpasticityStrokeStroke RehabilitationAdultAgedDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeUltrasonographyExtracorporeal shockwave therapyFascicle lengthPennation angleSpasticityStroke

Identifiers

PMID40841952
PMCPMC12372182

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.