ArticleEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2026
The use of botulinum toxin for spasticity in people with spinal cord injury: a scoping review.
Article in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spasticity and Abnormal Tone Regulation After Spinal Cord Injury: Mechanisms and the Effects of Neuromodulation.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- The use of botulinum toxin for spasticity in people with spinal cord injury: a scoping review.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis review synthesizes the literature on botulinum toxin (BoNT) for spasticity in spinal cord injury (SCI), with attention to definitions, treatment goals, outcome measures, injection protocols, and efficacy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus, and PEDro were conducted from 1995 to May 2025, supplemented by grey literature, trial registries, citation tracking, and expert consultation. Eligible studies investigated intramuscular BoNT in adults with SCI-related spasticity; other neurological conditions were excluded. No restrictions on design, setting, or geography were applied. Two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data using piloted templates. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Thirty-five studies (1995-2025) from 17 countries were included: 14 case reports/series, 10 observational studies, 2 retrospective cohorts, 2 randomized controlled trials, 1 crossover trial, 1 quasi-experimental study, and 5 systematic reviews. Most did not define spasticity; when reported, Lance's definition predominated, although Pandyan's is recommended in SCI. Goal setting was rarely described and seldom involved patients. Outcome measures primarily addressed impairment (e.g., Modified Ashworth Scale, passive range of motion), with limited attention to function or quality of life. BoNT protocols varied in toxin type, dose, target muscles, and use of guidance, and injection details were frequently underreported. Evidence of efficacy was weak: only three experimental studies were identified, all limited by small samples, lack of SCI-specific analyses, or incomplete reporting.
conclusionsEvidence on BoNT for SCI-related spasticity is scarce, heterogeneous, and methodologically weak. Future research should adopt consensus definitions, involve patients in goal setting, apply SCI-specific outcomes, and report protocols transparently to guide practice.
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.