Kaila A Holtz1, Elena Szefer2, Vanessa K Noonan3, Brian K Kwon4,5, Patricia B Mills6,7,8. 1. Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 2. Emmes Canada, Burnaby, BC, Canada. 3. Rick Hansen Institute, Vancouver British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 4. ICORD (International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 5. Vancouver Spine Surgery Institute, Department of Orthopaedics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 6. Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. patricia.mills@vch.ca. 7. ICORD (International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. patricia.mills@vch.ca. 8. Rehabilitation Research Program, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada. patricia.mills@vch.ca.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using the Rick Hansen SCI Registry (RHSCIR) and retrospective medical chart review. OBJECTIVE: To describe treatment patterns of in-patient anti-spasticity medication use following traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) in acute and rehabilitation hospital settings in British Columbia, Canada. SETTING: Quaternary trauma center, rehabilitation center. METHODS: Individuals with traumatic SCI between 2005 and 2014 enrolled in the Vancouver RHSCIR site (N = 917) were eligible for inclusion. Oral and injectable anti-spasticity medication use were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: In 769 participants, higher neurological level and injury severity were associated with in-patient anti-spasticity medication use (p < 0.001 for both). Of individuals with cervical and thoracic injuries (n = 589), 37% were prescribed anti-spasticity medication during hospital admission. Baclofen was the most commonly used first line oral therapy. Mean (SD) and median time from injury to Baclofen initiation was 70 (69) and 50 days, respectively. The probability of having initiated an in-patient anti-spasticity medication was 55% (95% CI (49, 60)) for individuals 6 months post-injury, and 71% (95% CI (62, 79)) for individuals 12 months post-injury. At community discharge, the prevalence of oral and injectable anti-spasticity medication use was 26 and 5%. Practice patterns of anti-spasticity medication use (2005-2009 vs. 2010-2014) have not changed significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first large prospective cohort study of in-patient anti-spasticity medication use following traumatic SCI. Results from our study inform clinicians and individuals of "real world" anti-spasticity medication use among individuals with traumatic SCI and may help guide care for this population in the community.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using the Rick Hansen SCI Registry (RHSCIR) and retrospective medical chart review. OBJECTIVE: To describe treatment patterns of in-patient anti-spasticity medication use following traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) in acute and rehabilitation hospital settings in British Columbia, Canada. SETTING: Quaternary trauma center, rehabilitation center. METHODS: Individuals with traumatic SCI between 2005 and 2014 enrolled in the Vancouver RHSCIR site (N = 917) were eligible for inclusion. Oral and injectable anti-spasticity medication use were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: In 769 participants, higher neurological level and injury severity were associated with in-patient anti-spasticity medication use (p < 0.001 for both). Of individuals with cervical and thoracic injuries (n = 589), 37% were prescribed anti-spasticity medication during hospital admission. Baclofen was the most commonly used first line oral therapy. Mean (SD) and median time from injury to Baclofen initiation was 70 (69) and 50 days, respectively. The probability of having initiated an in-patient anti-spasticity medication was 55% (95% CI (49, 60)) for individuals 6 months post-injury, and 71% (95% CI (62, 79)) for individuals 12 months post-injury. At community discharge, the prevalence of oral and injectable anti-spasticity medication use was 26 and 5%. Practice patterns of anti-spasticity medication use (2005-2009 vs. 2010-2014) have not changed significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first large prospective cohort study of in-patient anti-spasticity medication use following traumatic SCI. Results from our study inform clinicians and individuals of "real world" anti-spasticity medication use among individuals with traumatic SCI and may help guide care for this population in the community.
Authors: Eric R Theriault; Vincent Huang; Gale Whiteneck; Marcel P Dijkers; Noam Y Harel Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2016-11-14 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Ashan Veerakumar; Jennifer J Cheng; Abraham Sunshine; Xiaobu Ye; Richard D Zorowitz; William S Anderson Journal: Clin Neurol Neurosurg Date: 2014-12-06 Impact factor: 1.876
Authors: Kaila A Holtz; Rachel Lipson; Vanessa K Noonan; Brian K Kwon; Patricia B Mills Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-10-22 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Marcel F Dvorak; Charles G Fisher; Joel Hoekema; Michael Boyd; Vanessa Noonan; Peter C Wing; Brian K Kwon; Brian Kwon Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2005-10-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Jacquelyn J Cragg; Bobo Tong; Catherine R Jutzeler; Freda M Warner; Neil Cashman; Fred Geisler; John L K Kramer Journal: Neurotherapeutics Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 7.620
Authors: Kylie J Nabata; Emmanuel K Tse; Tom E Nightingale; Amanda H X Lee; Janice J Eng; Matthew Querée; Matthias Walter; Andrei V Krassioukov Journal: Curr Neuropharmacol Date: 2021 Impact factor: 7.363