Meythaler 1999b.
Methods | Randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled cross‐over trial. Setting: outpatient rehabilitation clinic, tertiary care university medical centre. Funding: Medtronic, Inc. |
|
Participants | Total participants: 17, all 17 participants with TBI (82% male). Adults: not reported, children: not reported; age range: 10‐55 years. Inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria: not reported. Location of spasticity: lower extremities, upper extremities could be included, > 2 extremities affected. |
|
Interventions |
Baclofen: continuous intrathecal infusion of baclofen 50 μg. A lumbar puncture was performed at either the L3‐L4 or the L2‐L3 interspace, and 1 mL was injected. Participants also received intensive inpatient rehabilitation to benefit from the decreased motor tone or increased voluntary motor control (or both) they experience with the intrathecal baclofen. After implantation of the infusion device, all participants received intrathecal baclofen 100 μg/day continuously. Placebo: preservative‐free normal saline. Cross‐over occurred during a second outpatient clinic at least 48 hours after the initial administration. |
|
Outcomes | Outcomes assessed at 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours post injection, 1, 3, 6, 9 months post pump placement. Primary outcome:
Secondary outcomes: not reported. Length of follow‐up: 1 year. |
|
Notes | No data for randomised component, prior to pump insertion. Author contacted and was attempting to locate the data; however, no further information received. "Postoperatively all patients in this study received 24 to 36 hours of intravenous vancomycin and gentamicin for prophylaxis of infection." Inclusion criteria stated minimum age of 14 years, yet at least some participants as young as 10 years. |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Study reported as randomised but method not described. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Allocation concealment not described. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | "Neither the patient nor the investigator knew which substance was injected until after the second trial phase was completed." |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | While the authors report that the 'investigator' was blinded, it was unclear if this investigator assessed outcomes. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | Low risk | Outcome data for all participants reported. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | No published protocol. |
Baseline Imbalances | Low risk | Baseline imbalances not clear but not relevant for a cross‐over trial. |
Appropriate study design (cross‐over trial only) | Low risk | A cross‐over study design was reasonable due to a small sample size. |
Adequate washout period (cross‐over trial only) | Unclear risk | Washout period not stated. |
Other bias | High risk | Unit of analysis issue. Outcomes were analysed by looking at upper vs lower extremities. "Rather than consider each muscle separately, scores for muscle tone, spasms, and reflexes were averaged for the upper or lower extremities in each patient." |