Real-world analysis of botulinum toxin (BoNT) injections in post-stroke spasticity: Higher doses of BoNT and longer intervals in the early-start group.

Our primary objective was to compare early-start vs. late-start Botulinum toxin (BoNT) injections in post-stroke spasticity management. This is an IRB approved retrospective chart review of patients who were admitted for inpatient rehabilitation within 6 months after first-ever stroke between January 2014 and December 2018 and received BoNT injections within 15 months. The total dose and interval between consecutive injections were used as objective outcomes. 2367 stroke admissions were reviewed. 189 patients metinclusion criteria. 68 out of 189 patients received BoNT injections within 12 weeks after stroke (EARLY group). 20 patients in the EARLY group who received at least three cycles were included for analysis. Out of 189 patients, 47 patients were categorized into the Early- and Late-start subgroups each by time from stroke onset to first BoNT injection (1st and 4th quartiles of time distribution) for comparisons. In the EARLY group, the first interval (Mean (M) = 7.6 weeks, standard deviation (SD) = 2.14) was significantly shorter than the second interval (M = 23.7, SD = 10.41) and the third interval (M = 20.0, SD = 11.23; p < 0.05). The dose at the first cycle (M = 492 units, SD = 201.5) was significantly lower than the dose at the third cycle (M = 605, SD = 82.6). In comparison between the Early- and Late-start subgroups, the time to first BoNT injection was 6.4 weeks (range: 4.7-8.6) after stroke for the Early-start subgroup and 49.6 weeks (range: 27.4-62.3) after stroke for the Late-start subgroup. The subsequent intervals after the first injection were significantly longer in the Early-start subgroup (M = 23.1 weeks) than in the Late-start subgroup (M = 14.6 weeks) (p = 0.008). The average total dose of BoNT was significantly higher in the Early-start subgroup (M = 561.9 units, SD = 143.1) than the Late-start subgroup (M = 470.0, SD = 164.8) (p = 0.012). The findings showed that higher doses of BoNT were used in the Early-start group, and often resulted in longer intervals between subsequent injections than in the Late-start group.

The impact of socioeconomic status and social deprivation on musculoskeletal limitations.

BACKGROUND: Objective (SES) and subjective socioeconomic status (SSS) affect symptom intensity and magnitude of limitations. Identification of potentially modifiable social risk factors might contribute to additional opportunities for optimizing musculoskeletal health. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) There are no correlations between magnitude of limitations (as measured with Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function [PROMIS PF computer adaptive test]) and components of SES or SSS in people with musculoskeletal disease; (2) There are no factors (including level of social deprivation) independently associated with PROMIS PF. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-nine patients presenting to clinicians specializing in the treatment of a broad variety of musculoskeletal conditions were prospectively enrolled in the study. We recorded patient demographics and assessed patients' socioeconomic status using the MacArthur Sociodemographic questionnaire and physical disability rating using PROMIS PF. Patients deprivation index was retrieved using their 9-digit ZIP codes. We used bivariate analysis to determine correlations between magnitude of limitations and socioeconomic status. We created a stepwise backward multivariable linear regression model to assess factors independently associated with PROMIS PF. RESULTS: Weak correlations were found on bivariate analysis of PROMIS PF with SSS measured as "Place in community" (r 0.28; P < 0.001) and "Place in the United States of America" (r 0.25; P = 0.002). In the multivariable models, the area deprivation index was not independently associated with physical limitations. Male gender (beta regression coefficient [ß] 4.1; 95% CI 0.71 to 7.5; P = 0.018) and having net worth of $5000 - $19,999 (ß 6.3; 95% CI 0.35 to 12; P = 0.038) or $20,000 - $99,999 (ß 5.8; 95% CI 2.1 to 9.5; P = 0.003) when compared to having net worth of less than $4999 were independently associated with better physical function. Being unemployed or disabled and keeping house, being a student, or retired were independently associated with worse physical function (ß -12; 95% CI -18 to -7.0; P < 0.001; ß -5.6; 95% CI -9.9 to -1.4; P = 0.009, respectively), when compared to working full-time or part-time. CONCLUSIONS: Objective and subjective measures of socioeconomic status are associated with magnitude of physical limitations in patients with musculoskeletal illness. These factors should be considered when developing treatment plans for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II prognostic study.