2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.09.124
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prevalence and Effect of Problematic Spasticity After Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

6
101
1
3

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 123 publications
(111 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
6
101
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This is consistent with previous findings showing that a large proportion of humans with complete SCI develop spasticity. 2-5 This is also consistent with evidence showing that the MAS is sensitive for assessing limb spasticity after chronic complete SCI. 29 Limitations have been highlighted in the inter-rater reliability 30 and validity 31 of the MAS.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…This is consistent with previous findings showing that a large proportion of humans with complete SCI develop spasticity. 2-5 This is also consistent with evidence showing that the MAS is sensitive for assessing limb spasticity after chronic complete SCI. 29 Limitations have been highlighted in the inter-rater reliability 30 and validity 31 of the MAS.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…2-5 Animal models of SCI showed that, after the injury, spinal motoneurons become highly excitable and sensitive to descending neurotransmitters. 6,7 Animals with spinal cord transection showed more spasticity when residual spinal brainstem-derived monoamines were present.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Spinal hyperexcitability is highly prevalent following spinal cord injury (SCI) and is problematic in at least one-third of patients (Holtz et al 2017). Spasticity is a form of involuntary contraction of muscles following sensory input induced by muscle stretch and it has been characterized as a velocity-dependent phenomenon (Lance, 1990) as a result of the primary endings (1a) that are highly sensitive to the velocity of stretch (Brown & Matthews, 1966).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%