Pharmacological interventions for spasticity following spinal cord injury: results of a Cochrane systematic review.

Europa medicophysica Pub Date : 2006-03-01
M Taricco, M C Pagliacci, E Telaro, R Adone
{"title":"Pharmacological interventions for spasticity following spinal cord injury: results of a Cochrane systematic review.","authors":"M Taricco, M C Pagliacci, E Telaro, R Adone","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Unlabelled: </strong>The aim of this paper was to assess the effectiveness and safety of baclofen, dantrolene, tizanidine and any other drugs for the treatment of long-term spasticity in spinal cord injury (SCI) patients, as well as the effectiveness and safety of different routes of administration of baclofen. A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), within the Cochrane Collaboration Injuries Group, was carried out. The Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched up to July 2006 without language restriction. Drug companies and experts active in the area were also contacted to find other relevant studies. Two investigators independently identified relevant studies, extracted data and assessed methodological quality of studies resolving disagreement by consensus. Nine out of 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. The heterogeneity among studies did not allow quantitative combination of</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Study designs were: 8 crossover, 1 parallel-group trial. Two studies (14 SCI patients) showed a significant effect of intrathecal baclofen in reducing spasticity (Ashworth score and activities of daily living [ADL] performances), compared to placebo, without any adverse effect. The study comparing tizanidine to placebo (118 SCI patients) showed a significant effect of tizanidine in improving Ashworth score but not in ADL performances. The tizanidine group reported significant rates of adverse effects (drowsiness, xerostomia). For the other drugs (gabapentine, clonidine, diazepam, amytal and oral baclofen) the results do not provide evidence for a clinical significant effectiveness. This systematic review indicates that there is insufficient evidence to assist clinicians in a rational approach to antispastic treatment for SCI. Further research is urgently needed to improve the scientific basis of patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":87180,"journal":{"name":"Europa medicophysica","volume":"42 1","pages":"5-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europa medicophysica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unlabelled: The aim of this paper was to assess the effectiveness and safety of baclofen, dantrolene, tizanidine and any other drugs for the treatment of long-term spasticity in spinal cord injury (SCI) patients, as well as the effectiveness and safety of different routes of administration of baclofen. A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), within the Cochrane Collaboration Injuries Group, was carried out. The Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched up to July 2006 without language restriction. Drug companies and experts active in the area were also contacted to find other relevant studies. Two investigators independently identified relevant studies, extracted data and assessed methodological quality of studies resolving disagreement by consensus. Nine out of 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. The heterogeneity among studies did not allow quantitative combination of

Results: Study designs were: 8 crossover, 1 parallel-group trial. Two studies (14 SCI patients) showed a significant effect of intrathecal baclofen in reducing spasticity (Ashworth score and activities of daily living [ADL] performances), compared to placebo, without any adverse effect. The study comparing tizanidine to placebo (118 SCI patients) showed a significant effect of tizanidine in improving Ashworth score but not in ADL performances. The tizanidine group reported significant rates of adverse effects (drowsiness, xerostomia). For the other drugs (gabapentine, clonidine, diazepam, amytal and oral baclofen) the results do not provide evidence for a clinical significant effectiveness. This systematic review indicates that there is insufficient evidence to assist clinicians in a rational approach to antispastic treatment for SCI. Further research is urgently needed to improve the scientific basis of patient care.

脊髓损伤后痉挛的药物干预:Cochrane系统评价的结果。
未标记:本研究旨在评价巴氯芬、丹曲林、替扎尼定等药物治疗脊髓损伤(SCI)患者长期痉挛的有效性和安全性,以及巴氯芬不同给药途径的有效性和安全性。对Cochrane协作组的随机对照试验(rct)进行了系统回顾。检索截至2006年7月的Cochrane损伤组专门登记册、Cochrane对照试验登记册、MEDLINE、EMBASE和CINAHL,无语言限制。还联系了活跃在该领域的制药公司和专家,以寻找其他相关研究。两位研究者独立确定相关研究,提取数据并评估研究的方法学质量,通过共识解决分歧。55项研究中有9项符合纳入标准。研究间的异质性不允许定量组合。结果:研究设计为:8个交叉,1个平行组试验。两项研究(14例SCI患者)显示,与安慰剂相比,鞘内巴氯芬在降低痉挛(Ashworth评分和日常生活活动[ADL]表现)方面有显著效果,无任何不良反应。比较替扎尼定与安慰剂(118例SCI患者)的研究显示,替扎尼定对改善Ashworth评分有显著作用,但对ADL表现无显著影响。替扎尼定组报告了显著的不良反应(嗜睡、口干)。对于其他药物(加巴喷丁、可乐定、地西泮、阿米妥和口服巴氯芬),结果没有提供临床显著有效性的证据。该系统综述表明,没有足够的证据来帮助临床医生对脊髓损伤进行合理的抗痉挛治疗。迫切需要进一步研究,以提高患者护理的科学基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书