Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2013-9
Does giving segmental muscle vibration alter the response to botulinum toxin injections in the treatment of spasticity in people with multiple sclerosis? A single-blind randomized controlled trial
To determine if segmental muscle vibration and botulinum toxin-A injection, either alone or in combination, reduces spasticity in a sample of patients with multiple sclerosis.
Design:
Single-blind, randomized controlled trial.
Setting:
Physical medicine and rehabilitation outpatients service.
Subjects:
Forty-two patients affected by the secondary progressive form of multiple sclerosis randomized to group A (30 minutes of 120 Hz segmental muscle vibration over the rectus femoris and gastrocnemius medial and lateral, three per week, over a period of four weeks), group B (botulinum toxin in the rectus femoris, gastrocnemius medial and lateral and soleus, and segmental muscle vibration) and group C (botulinum toxin).
Main measures:
Modified Ashworth Scale at knee and ankle, and Fatigue Severity Scale. All the measurements were performed at baseline (T0), 10 weeks (T1) and 22 weeks (T2) postallocation.
Results:
Modified Ashworth Scale at knee and ankle significantly decreased over time (p < 0.001) in all groups. Patients in group C displayed a significant increase of knee and ankle spasticity at T2 when compared with T1 (p < 0.05). Fatigue Severity Scale values in groups A and C were significantly higher at T0 [A: 53.6 (2.31); C: 48.5 (2.77)] than at either T1 [A: 48.6 (2.21); p = 0.03; C: 43.5 (3.22); p = 0.03] or T2 [A: 46.7 (2.75); p = 0.02; 42.5 (2.17); p = 0.02], while no differences were detected in group B [T0: 43.4 (3.10); T1: 37.3 (3.15); T2: 39.7 (2.97)].
Conclusion:
Segmental muscle vibration and botulinum toxin-A reduces spasticity and improves fatigue in the medium-term follow-up in patients with multiple sclerosis.
BarnesMPKentRMSemlyenJK, et al. Spasticity in multiple sclerosis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2003; 17: 66–70.
2.
RizzoMAHadjimichaelOCPreiningerovaJ, et al. Prevalence and treatment of spasticity reported by multiple sclerosis patients. Mult Scler2004; 10: 589–95.
3.
BalantrapuSSandroffBMSosnoffJJ, et al. Perceived impact of spasticity is associated with spatial and temporal parameters of gait in multiple sclerosis. ISRN Neurol. Epub ahead of print 17January2012. DOI: 10.5402/2012/675431.
4.
SosnoffJJGappmaierEFrameA, et al. Influence of spasticity on mobility and balance in persons with multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Phys Ther2011; 35: 129–132.
5.
HymanNBarnesMBhaktaB, et al. Botulinum toxin (Dysport) treatment of hip adduttor spasticity in multiple sclerosis: a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled, dose ranging study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2000; 68: 707–715.
6.
GiovannelliMBorrielloGCastriP, et al. Early physiotherapy after injection of botulinum toxin increases the beneficial effects on spasticity in patients with multiple sclerosis. Clin Rehabil2007; 21: 331–337.
7.
HabekMKarniABalashY, et al. The place of the botulinum toxin in the management of multiple sclerosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg2010; 112: 592–596.
8.
Varghese-KrollEElovicEP. Contralateral weakness and fatigue after high-dose botulinum toxin injection for management of poststroke spasticity. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2009; 88: 495–499.
9.
NomaTMatsumotoSEtohS, et al. Anti-spastic effects of the direct application of vibratory stimuli to the spastic muscles of hemiplegic limbs in post- stroke patients. Brain Inj2009; 23: 623–631.
10.
RollJPVedelJPRibotE. Alteration of proprioceptive messages induced by tendon vibration in man: a microneurographic study. Exp Brain Res1989; 76: 213–222.
11.
SteyversMLevinOVan BaelenM, et al. Corticospinal excitability changes following prolonged muscle tendon vibration. Neuroreport2003; 14: 1901–1905.
12.
RosenkranzKRothwellJC. Differential effect of muscle vibration on intracortical inhibitory circuits in humans. J Physiol2003; 551: 649–660.
13.
PolmanCHReingoldSCEdanG, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the "McDonald Criteria". Ann Neurol2005; 58: 840–846.
14.
KurtzkeJ. Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology1984; 33: 1444–1452.
15.
BohannonRWSmithMB. Inter-rater reliability on a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther1987; 67: 206–207.
16.
KruppLBLaRocaNGMuir-NashJ, et al. The fatigue severity scale. Application to patients with multiple sclerosis and systematic lupos erythematosus. Arch Neurol1989; 46: 1121–1123.
17.
van der PuttenJJHobartJCFreemanJA, et al. Measuring change in disability after inpatient rehabilitation: comparison of the responsiveness of the Barthel index and the Functional Independence Measure. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1999; 66: 480–484.
18.
BrownMCEngbergIMatthewsPBC. The relative sensitivity to vibration of muscle receptors of the cat. J Physiol1967; 192: 773–800.
19.
NeckingLELundströmRDahlinLB, et al. Tissue displacement is a causative factor in vibration- induced muscle injury. J Hand Surg1996; 21: 753–757.
20.
HagbarthKEEklundG. The effects of muscle vibration in spasticity, rigidity, and cerebellar disorders. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1968; 31: 207–213.
21.
Santos-FilhoSDCameronMHBernardo-FilhoM. Benefits of whole-body vibration with an oscillating platform for people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. Mult Scler Int2012; 2012: 274728. DOI: 10.1155/2012/274728.
22.
SchynsFPaulLFinlayK, et al. Vibration therapy in multiple sclerosis: a pilot study exploring its effects on tone, muscle force, sensation and functional performance. Clin Rehabil2009; 23: 771–781.
23.
SchieppatiM. The Hoffmann reflex: a means of assessing spinal reflex excitability and its descending control in man. Progr Neurobiol1987; 28: 345–376.
24.
KatzR. Presynaptic inhibition in humans: a comparison between normal and spastic patients. J Physiol Paris1999; 93: 379–385.
25.
HagbarthKEWallinGLofstedtL. Muscle spindle responses to stretch in normal and spastic subjects. Scand J Rehabil Med1973; 5: 156–159.
26.
NomaTMatsumotoSShimodozonoM, et al. Anti-spastic effects of the direct application of vibratory stimuli to the spastic muscles of hemiplegic limbs in post-stroke patients: a proof-of-principle study. J Rehabil Med2012; 44: 325–330.
27.
McNultyPAJankelowitzSKWiendelsTM, et al. Postactivation depression of the soleus H reflex measured using threshold tracking. J Neurophysiol2008; 100: 3275–3284.
28.
MurilloNKumruHVidal-SamsoJ, et al. Decrease of spasticity with muscle vibration in patients with spinal cord injury. Clin Neurophysiol2011; 122: 1183–1189.
29.
SiggelkowSKossevASchubertM, et al. Modulation of motor evoked potentials by muscle vibration: the role of vibration frequency. Muscle Nerve1999; 22: 1544–1548.
30.
RosenkranzKPesentiAPaulusW, et al. Focal reduction of intracortical inhibition in the motor cortex by selective proprioceptive stimulation. Exp Brain Res2003; 149: 9–16.
31.
Forner-CorderoASteyversMLevinO, et al. Changes in corticomotor excitability following prolonged muscle tendon vibration. Behav Brain Res2008; 190: 41–49.
32.
MarconiBFilippiGMKochG, et al. Long-term effects on motor cortical excitability induced by repeated muscle vibration during contraction in healthy subjects. J Neurol Sci2008; 275: 51–59.
33.
PaoloniMMangoneMScettriP, et al. Segmental muscle vibration improves walking in chronic stroke patients with foot drop: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2010; 24: 254–262.
34.
PalomarFJMirP. Neurophysiological changes after intramuscular injection of botulinum toxin. Clin Neurophysiol2012; 123: 54–60.
35.
FrascarelliFDi RosaGBisozziE, et al. Neurophysiological changes induced by the botulinum toxin type A injection in children with cerebral palsy. Eur J Paediatr Neurol2011; 15: 59–64.
36.
CurràABerardelliA. Do the unintended actions of botulinum toxin at distant sites have clinical implications?Neurology2009; 72: 1095–1099.
37.
CurràATrompettoCAbbruzzeseG, et al. Central effects of botulinum toxin type A: evidence and supposition. Mov Disord2004; 19(Suppl 8): S60–64.
38.
LerdalAWahlARustoenT, et al. Fatigue in the general population: a translation and test of the psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the fatigue severity scale. Scand J Public Health2005; 33: 123–130.
39.
TomasevicLZitoGPasqualettiP, et al. Cortico-muscular coherence as an index of fatigue in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler2013; 19(3): 334–343.
40.
NichollLHobartJDunwoodyL, et al. Measuring disability in multiple sclerosis: is the Community Dependency Index an improvement on the Barthel Index?Mult Scler2004; 10: 447–450.
41.
FleurenJFVoermanGEErren-WoltersCV, et al. Stop using the Ashworth Scale for the assessment of spasticity. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2010; 81: 46–52.
42.
RasovaKMartinkovaPVyskotovaJ, et al. Assessment set for evaluation of clinical outcomes in multiple sclerosis: psychometric properties. Patient Relat Outcome Meas2012; 3: 59–70.
