Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 51-6 | Page 43

Functional effects of botulinum toxin in patients with HSP hip abduction was measured using a goniometer. All outcomes were averaged for both sides into a single score. Functional tests. Functional balance was assessed barefooted with the Berg Balance Scale (BBS, range 0–56) (18). The Timed Up and Go (TUG test) (19) was performed with (adapted) shoes and/or orthoses, but without other walking aids. Endurance was assessed with the 6-min Walk Test (6MWT) (20) during which all walking aids were allowed. Lastly, the Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) scale (21) was obtained as a sub- jective measure of mobility and balance. Procedure All outcome measurements were performed on the day of treatment prior to the injections (baseline; T0), 6 (± 1) weeks after treatment (T1), and 16 (± 1) weeks after treatment (T2). T1 was set at 6 weeks after treatment, because at this time-point the physiological effects of BTX-A on spasticity were expected to have reached a maximum (11). The effects of BTX-A were expected to diminish progressively until approximately 16 weeks after the injections. Hence, T2 was set at 16 weeks post- treatment to test the possible presence of a long-term effect of the combined treatment. The instrumented assessments were taken by the primary investigator. All other tests were assessed by an independent physiotherapist. Statistical analysis All instrumented (parametric) outcome measures were tested using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). The primary outcomes gait width and sidestep leg angle were tested using time (T0 – T1 – T2) as within-subjects factor. For gait width and gait speed, also gait condition (preferred – maximal) was introduced as a within-subjects factor. Bonferroni corrected post-hoc tests were applied in the case of a significant main effect of time. All other (non-parametric) outcome measures (physical and functional tests) were analysed with a Friedman’s test using time (T0 – T1 – T2) as a within-subject factor. Wilcoxon’s tests were used for post-hoc comparisons in the case of a significant time effect. All statistical analyses were performed using IMB SPSS Statistics Version 22 for Windows. The α-level was set at 0.05 for all analyses, with no adjustment for multiple outcomes. RESULTS Participants From the total of 25 patients included in the study, 3 patients were lost between the first (T0) and second measurements (T1): 1 patient experienced increasing shoulder complaints that were already present before the first visit. One patient was lost due to spontaneous severe back pain, which had also repeatedly occurred in the past. A third patient left the study due to perso- nal circumstances. No other adverse events occurred during the study. Instrumented gait assessments Table III summarizes the group results for all measu- rements. There was a significant time effect on gait width (F(2,42) = 6.143, p = 0.005). Gait width increased by 12.6% from baseline to T1 (p = 0.021), and this im- provement persisted at T2 (9.7%; p = 0.022) (see Fig. 2a). There was no effect of gait condition on gait width (F(1,21) = 1.229, p = 0.280), nor was there a significant time × gait condition interaction (F(2,42) = 1.081, p = 0.349). Table III. Outcomes measures  Friedman’s test or repeated- measures ANOVA Test Before intervention (T0) After 6 weeks (T1) After 16 weeks (T2) GaitRite, mean (SD) [95% CI] Gait width – preferred speed, cm Gait width – maximal speed, cm 10.7 (5.8) [8.1–13.2] 10.0 (6.0) [7.4–12.7] 11.8 (6.0) [9.1–14.4] 11.5 (6.1) [8.8–14.2] 11.3 (5.7) [8.7–13.8] 11.2 (5.8) [8.7–13.8] F(2,42)  = 6.143 0.96 (0.25) [0.85–1.07) 1.31 (0.41) [1.14–1.50] 1.04 (0.26) [0.93–1.16] 1.33 (0.35) [1.17–1.48] 1.07 (0.28) [0.94–1.20] 1.36 (0.41) [1.18–1.54] F(2,42)  = 15.265 F(2,42)  = 1.140 19.8 (3.8) [17.9–21.6] 19.3 (4.7) [16.5–22.2] 20.2 (4.1) [18.2–22,1] 19.4 (5.2) [16.3–22.6] F(2,32)  = 8.568 F(2,24)  = 0.107 Comfortable gait speed, m/s Maximal gait speed, m/s Radboud Falls Simulator Leg angle – known dir, mean (SD) [95% CI] 18.7 (4.1) [16.7–20.7] Leg angle – unknown dir, mean (SD) [95% CI] 19.1 (4.7) [16.3–22.0] χ 2 (2, n  = 21)  = 12.559 Success rates – known dir, %, median [IQR] 70.0 [45.0] 90.0 [30.0] 90.0 [45.0] Success rates – unknown dir, %, median [IQR] 25.0 [55.0] Clinical assessments 35.0 [72.5] 45.0 [70.0] χ 2 (2, n  = 22)  = 4.388 p-value 0.005 a < 0.001 b 0.330 0.001 a 0.899 0.002 c 0.111 MAS – hip adductors, median [IQR] 2.5 [1.3] 1.0 [1.5] 1.8 [1.0] χ 2 (2, n  = 22)  = 33.890 < 0.001 d MRC – hip adductors, median [IQR] 5.0 [0.0] 4.0 [1.0] 5.0 [0.3] χ 2 (2, n  = 22)  = 15.800 < 0.001 e MRC – hip abductors, median [IQR] 5.0 [0.1] 5.0 [1.0] 5.0 [0.0] χ 2 (2, n  = 22)  = 4.957 50.7 (12.5) [45.2–56.2] 45.0 (10.8) [40.2–49.8] F(2,42)  = 31.613 51.5 [9.0] 10.7 (4.2) [8.6–12.9] 376.0 (95.8) [327.0–425.2] 54.7 (22.8) [43.0–66.4] 51.0 [7.8] 10.5 (4.3) [8.3–12.7] 382.1 (95.2)[333.2–431.0] 51.5 (23.7) [39.3–63.6] χ 2 (2, n  = 22)  = 4.031 F(2,42)  = 0.198 F(2,32)  = 2.498 F(2,42)  = 2.048 ROM – hip abduction, mean (SD) [95% CI] 38.8 (9.4) [34.6–42.9] Other functional tests BBS, median [IQR] TUG, s, mean (SD) [95% CI] 6MWT, s, mean (SD) [95% CI] ABC scale, %, mean (SD) [95% CI] 437 49.5 [10.0] 10.6 (3.8) [8.6–12.6] 367.5 (87.9) [322.3–412.7] 55.0 (21.85) [43.8–66.2] 0.084 < 0.001 f 0.133 0.821 0.098 0.142 a T0T2>T1; e T0/2>T1, T0  = T2; f T0