456
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Perspectives in Rehabilitation

Do randomised controlled trials evaluating functional outcomes following botulinum neurotoxin-A align with focal spasticity guidelines? A systematic review

, , ORCID Icon, , ORCID Icon, , ORCID Icon, , & ORCID Icon show all
Pages 8515-8523 | Received 26 Jul 2021, Accepted 21 Nov 2021, Published online: 04 Jan 2022
 

Abstract

Purpose

The impact of botulinum neurotoxin-A (BoNT-A) on functional outcomes when managing focal muscle spasticity remains unclear. It is possible that randomised controlled trial (RCT) design and/or reporting may be a contributing factor. The objective of this review was to determine the extent to which RCTs evaluating functional outcomes following BoNT-A align with focal spasticity guidelines.

Materials and methods

RCTs published from 2010 were included if they targeted focal spasticity, included BoNT-A, randomised a physical intervention to the upper/lower limb, or the primary outcome(s) related to the activity/participation domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Data extraction and quality appraisal using the Modified PEDro and Modified McMasters Tool were performed independently by two reviewers. General research practices were also extracted such as compliance with therapy reporting guidelines.

Results

Fifty-two RCTs were eligible. Individualised goal setting was uncommon (25%). Six studies (11.5%) included multi-disciplinary management, and five (9.6%) included patient/caregiver education. Four studies (7.7%) measured outcomes beyond 6 months. The Median Modified PEDro score was 11/15.

Conclusions

Alignment with focal spasticity guidelines in RCTs was generally low. Our understanding of the impact of focal spasticity management on functional outcomes may be improved if RCT design aligned more closely with guideline recommendations.

    IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION

  • The influence of BoNT-A on improved functional outcomes is yet to be determined.

  • Individualised goal setting with a multi-disciplinary team is uncommon in an RCT design, despite it being a key guideline recommendation.

  • Given the long-term nature of spasticity management, guidelines recommend short as well as long-term reviews following intervention however RCTs rarely assess beyond 6 months.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Each of the authors has read and concurs with the content in the final manuscript. The material within has not been and will not be submitted for publication elsewhere except as an abstract. This funder played no role in the design, conduct, or reporting of this study.

Additional information

Funding

Edwina Sutherland and Dr. Bridget Hill’s work on this review was financially supported by a grant from the Epworth Medical Foundation.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.