American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation · 2026
Factors Influencing the Selection of Botulinum Toxin Preparations for the Management of Spasticity.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vu Peter D, Korupolu Radha, B Ivanhoe Cindy, Li Sheng, Francisco Gerard E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To identify and prioritize key factors influencing clinicians' selection of BoNT formulations for chronic spasticity treatment to inform future guidelines and standardize decision-making.
DESIGN: Modified two-round Delphi study with international spasticity management experts.
SETTING: International survey involving clinicians from various practice settings.
PARTICIPANTS: Round 1: 108 clinicians rating decision factors; Round 2: 55 respondents ranking factors. Convenience sampling of international spasticity experts.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Importance ratings of seven decision-making categories using 5-point Likert scales (Round 1) and factor ranking (Round 2). Inter-rater agreement assessed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance.
RESULTS: Respondents primarily used onabotulinumtoxinA, abobotulinumtoxinA, and incobotulinumtoxinA. Round 1 identified economic factors as most important (mean 3.74 points), followed by hospital/system factors (3.53 points) and toxin-specific factors (3.27 points). Round 2 revealed disease-specific factors as highest priority (14 first-place votes, mean rank 3.42 points), followed by injector expertise and toxin characteristics. Kendall's coefficient was 0.35, indicating moderate agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: BoNT formulation selection involves multiple factors with significant practice variability. While economic and institutional considerations influence decisions, clinicians prioritize disease characteristics, clinical expertise, and toxin properties when ranking options. Evidence-based guidelines are needed to reduce practice variation and improve BoNT-based spasticity management.
DESIGN: Modified two-round Delphi study with international spasticity management experts.
SETTING: International survey involving clinicians from various practice settings.
PARTICIPANTS: Round 1: 108 clinicians rating decision factors; Round 2: 55 respondents ranking factors. Convenience sampling of international spasticity experts.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Importance ratings of seven decision-making categories using 5-point Likert scales (Round 1) and factor ranking (Round 2). Inter-rater agreement assessed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance.
RESULTS: Respondents primarily used onabotulinumtoxinA, abobotulinumtoxinA, and incobotulinumtoxinA. Round 1 identified economic factors as most important (mean 3.74 points), followed by hospital/system factors (3.53 points) and toxin-specific factors (3.27 points). Round 2 revealed disease-specific factors as highest priority (14 first-place votes, mean rank 3.42 points), followed by injector expertise and toxin characteristics. Kendall's coefficient was 0.35, indicating moderate agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: BoNT formulation selection involves multiple factors with significant practice variability. While economic and institutional considerations influence decisions, clinicians prioritize disease characteristics, clinical expertise, and toxin properties when ranking options. Evidence-based guidelines are needed to reduce practice variation and improve BoNT-based spasticity management.