| Title |
Long-term effects of injection of botulinum toxin type A combined with home-based functional training for post-stroke patients with spastic upper limb hemiparesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Neurologica Belgica, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13760-013-0208-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Toru Takekawa, Masahiro Abo, Kazuaki Ebihara, Kensuke Taguchi, Yousuke Sase, Wataru Kakuda |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to assess the effects of botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) injection with home-based functional training for passive and active motor function, over a 6-month period in post-stroke patients with upper limb spasticity. We studied 190 patients with at least 6-month history of stroke. They received injections of BoNT-A in upper limb muscles and detailed one-to-one instructions for home-based functional training. At baseline (before therapy), and at 1-, 3- and 6-month follow-up, Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) and Wolf motor function test (WMFT) were used to assess active motor function, the modified Ashworth scale (MAS) for assessment of spasticity, and the range of motion (ROM) for passive motor function. The total score for upper limb and scores of categories A and B of the FMA increased significantly at 1, 3 and 6 months, while the FMA score for category D increased significantly at 3 and 6 months, but not at 1 month. Significant decreases in the MAS scores were noted in all muscles examined at 1, 3 and 6 months, compared with baseline. The ROM for elbow joint extension significantly improved at 1, 3, and 6 months, while that for wrist joint extension increased significantly at 1 month, but not 3 or 6 months, compared with baseline. The results suggest that comprehensive improvement of motor function requires improvement of motor function in the proximal part of the upper limb and that BoNT-A followed by rehabilitation reduces spasticity and improves motor function of fingers. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 80 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 16% |
| Researcher | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 26 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 21% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 7 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 32 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2013.
All research outputs
#21,699,788
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neurologica Belgica
#613
of 809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,332
of 198,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neurologica Belgica
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 198,464 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.