Treatment of spasticity.

Spasticity is characterized by an enhanced size and reduced threshold for activation of stretch reflexes and is associated with "positive signs" such as clonus and spasms, as well as "negative features" such as paresis and a loss of automatic postural responses. Spasticity develops over time after a lesion and can be associated with reduced speed of movement, cocontraction, abnormal synergies, and pain. Spasticity is caused by a combination of damage to descending tracts, reductions in inhibitory activity within spinal cord circuits, and adaptive changes within motoneurons. Increased tone, hypertonia, can also be caused by changes in passive stiffness due to, for example, increase in connective tissue and reduction in muscle fascicle length. Understanding the cause of hypertonia is important for determining the management strategy as nonneural, passive causes of stiffness will be more amenable to physical rather than pharmacological interventions. The management of spasticity is determined by the views and goals of the patient, family, and carers, which should be integral to the multidisciplinary assessment. An assessment, and treatment, of trigger factors such as infection and skin breakdown should be made especially in people with a recent change in tone. The choice of management strategies for an individual will vary depending on the severity of spasticity, the distribution of spasticity (i.e., whether it affects multiple muscle groups or is more prominent in one or two groups), the type of lesion, and the potential for recovery. Management options include physical therapy, oral agents; focal therapies such as botulinum injections; and peripheral nerve blocks. Intrathecal baclofen can lead to a reduction in required oral antispasticity medications. When spasticity is severe intrathecal phenol may be an option. Surgical interventions, largely used in the pediatric population, include muscle transfers and lengthening and selective dorsal root rhizotomy.

"I'm in a very good frame of mind": a qualitative exploration of the experience of standing frame use in people with progressive multiple sclerosis.

OBJECTIVES: The study aim was to explore the experiences of people with progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) and their standing assistants during their participation in Standing Up in Multiple Sclerosis, a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a home-based, self-managed standing frame programme. DESIGN: A qualitative approach, using audio diary methodology was used to collect data contemporaneously. Diary data were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. SETTING: Participants were recruited from eight healthcare organisations in two regions of the UK. The intervention was home-based. PARTICIPANTS: As part of the RCT, 140 participants were randomly allocated to either usual care or usual care plus a standing frame programme. Using a sampling matrix 12 people with progressive MS (6 female, aged 35-71 years, Expanded Disability Status Scale 6.5-8.0) and 8 standing assistants (4 female) kept audio diaries of their experiences. INTERVENTION: The standing frame programme involved two face-to-face home-based physiotherapy sessions to set up the standing frame programme, supplemented by educational material designed to optimise self-efficacy. Participants were encouraged to stand for at least 30 min, three times a week for the 36-week study period. RESULTS: Four main themes were identified: "Feeling like the old me"; 'Noticing a difference'; "I want to do it right" and "You have a good day, you have a bad day". CONCLUSIONS: Supported standing helped people with progressive MS feel more like their old selves and provided a sense of normality and enjoyment. People noticed improvements in physical and psychological symptoms, which were often associated with increased participation in activities they valued. Provision of support from a physiotherapist and recognition of the variable nature of the condition were highlighted as factors to consider when establishing a standing programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN69614598.

Assessment of a home-based standing frame programme in people with progressive multiple sclerosis (SUMS): a pragmatic, multi-centre, randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: People severely impaired with progressive multiple sclerosis spend much of their day sitting, with very few options to improve motor function. As a result, secondary physical and psychosocial complications can occur. Effective and feasible self-management strategies are needed to reduce sedentary behaviour and enhance motor function. In this study, we aimed to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of a home-based, self-managed, standing frame programme. METHODS: SUMS was a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled superiority trial of people with progressive multiple sclerosis and severe mobility impairment, undertaken in eight centres from two regions in the UK. The study had assessor-blinded outcome assessments with use of clinician-rated and patient-rated measures at baseline, 20 weeks, and 36 weeks. After baseline assessment, participants were randomised (1:1) by computer-generated assignment to either a standing frame programme plus usual care or usual care alone. The intervention consisted of two home-based physiotherapy sessions (60 min each) to set up the standing frame programme, supported by six follow-up telephone calls (15 min per call). Participants were asked to stand for 30 min, three times per week over 20 weeks, and encouraged to continue in the longer term, although no further physiotherapy support was provided. The primary clinical outcome was motor function measured by the Amended Motor Club Assessment (AMCA) score at week 36, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population (excluding only patients who were deemed ineligible after randomisation, those who withdrew from the trial and were unwilling for their previously collected data to be used, or those who did not provide baseline and week 36 measurements). A 9-point AMCA score change was considered clinically meaningful a priori. Adverse events were collected through a daily preformatted patient diary throughout the 36 weeks and analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population. An economic assessment established the resources required to provide the standing frame programme, estimated intervention costs, and estimate cost effectiveness. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN69614598. FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2015, and April 28, 2017, 285 people with progressive multiple sclerosis were screened for eligibility, and 140 were randomly assigned to either the standing frame group (n=71) or the usual care group (n=69). Of these, 122 completed the primary outcome assessment (61 participants in both groups) for the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The use of the standing frame resulted in a significant increase in AMCA score compared with that for usual care alone, with a fully adjusted between-group difference in AMCA score at 36 weeks of 4·7 points (95% CI 1·9-7·5; p=0·0014). For adverse events collected through patient diaries, we observed a disparity between the two groups in the frequency of short-term musculoskeletal pain (486 [41%] of 1188 adverse events in the standing frame group vs 160 [22%] of 736 adverse events in the usual care group), which was potentially related to the intervention. The musculoskeletal pain lasted longer than 7 days in five participants (two in the standing frame group and three in the usual care group). No serious adverse events related to the study occurred. The standing frame group had a mean 0·018 (95% CI -0·014 to 0·051) additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with those of the usual care group, and the estimated incremental cost-per-QALY was approximately £14 700. INTERPRETATION: The standing frame programme significantly increased motor function in people with severe progressive multiple sclerosis, although not to the degree that was considered a priori as clinically meaningful. The standing frame is one of the first physiotherapy interventions to be effective in this population. We suggest that the programme is feasible as a home-based, self-managed intervention that could be routinely implemented in clinical practice in the UK. FUNDING: UK National Institute of Health Research.

The safety of baclofen in pregnancy: intrathecal therapy in multiple sclerosis.

Intrathecal baclofen is a GABA-receptor agonist and one of the mainstay treatments of severe spasticity due to multiple sclerosis (MS). The authors report a case on the use of intrathecal baclofen administered using a Medtronic Synchromed II infusion pump. A healthy male infant (2.68 kg, Apgars 9 and 10) was born at 36 weeks gestation by cesarean section, under general anesthetic. This is the fifth reported case of intrathecal baclofen administered during pregnancy and adds to the knowledge that thus far it is relatively safe in pregnancy and may in fact be safer for the infant than oral baclofen. This is the first case report of the use of intrathecal baclofen in pregnancy and MS.

The nurse's role in assessing and measuring spasticity.

Spasticity is a common feature of neurological conditions such as multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy, stroke, brain and spinal injuries. The management of spasticity remains a challenge for not only the person with spasticity but also their family, carers and healthcare professionals. Accurate assessment and measurement is essential to ensure individuals receive the most appropriate interventions.

Attitudes to long-term care in multiple sclerosis.

At a recent conference workshop, a group of specialist nurses examined their attitudes towards individuals with multiple sclerosis moving into long-term care. This article summarises how the group members examined their attitudes, the literature reviewed and what was learnt by sharing experiences. It also suggests how nurses could promote positive attitudes towards, and ease, the transition of patients into long-term residential care.