Efficacy and Safety Dose Titration Study of Botulinum Toxin Type A to Treat Spasticity in the Leg and Arm

The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

Clinical pattern treated at corresponding cycle of the same body side as the selected target joint. The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

Clinical pattern treated at corresponding cycle of the same body side as the selected target joint. The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

Clinical pattern treated at corresponding cycle of the same body side as the selected target joint. The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

Clinical pattern treated at corresponding cycle of the same body side as the selected target joint. The AS is a well known and commonly used scale in clinical trials with spasticity. It was considered to be the best clinical tool for measuring resistance to movement. It was used to categorize the severity of spasticity by judging resistance to passive movement. It is a 5-point scale that ranges from 0 (=no increase in tone) to 4 (=limb rigid in flexion or extension).

The REPAS is a summary 26-item test used to assess resistance to passive movement in all four limbs of the body. It provides a global evaluation of spasticity status, as well as per hemibody and per limb. 16 items describe the condition of both upper limbs, 10 that of both lower limbs. Each item is rated by using the Ashworth Scale. The sum of the values represent the REPAS score which may range from zero (no resistance for any item) to 104 (limbs rigid for all items). Here, the hemi-REPAS was evaluated, i.e. the maximum value for the treated body side was 52.

The REPAS is a summary 26-item test used to assess resistance to passive movement in all four limbs of the body. It provides a global evaluation of spasticity status, as well as per hemibody and per limb. 16 items describe the condition of both upper limbs, 10 that of both lower limbs. Each item is rated by using the Ashworth Scale. The sum of the values represent the REPAS score which may range from zero (no resistance for any item) to 104 (limbs rigid for all items). Here, the hemi-REPAS was evaluated, i.e. the maximum value for the treated body side was 52.

The REPAS is a summary 26-item test used to assess resistance to passive movement in all four limbs of the body. It provides a global evaluation of spasticity status, as well as per hemibody and per limb. 16 items describe the condition of both upper limbs, 10 that of both lower limbs. Each item is rated by using the Ashworth Scale. The sum of the values represent the REPAS score which may range from zero (no resistance for any item) to 104 (limbs rigid for all items). Here, the hemi-REPAS was evaluated, i.e. the maximum value for the treated body side was 52.

The REPAS is a summary 26-item test used to assess resistance to passive movement in all four limbs of the body. It provides a global evaluation of spasticity status, as well as per hemibody and per limb. 16 items describe the condition of both upper limbs, 10 that of both lower limbs. Each item is rated by using the Ashworth Scale. The sum of the values represent the REPAS score which may range from zero (no resistance for any item) to 104 (limbs rigid for all items). Here, the hemi-REPAS was evaluated, i.e. the maximum value for the treated body side was 52.

The FAC examines the independence and ambulation of subjects whereby supervision/physical assistance from 1 person is allowed. Subjects are classified to following categories: Level 0: no functional ambulation; Level 1: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level II); Level 2: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level I); Level 3: Ambulator-dependent for supervision; Level 4: Ambulator-independent, level surface only; Level 5: Ambulator-independent.

The FAC examines the independence and ambulation of subjects whereby supervision/physical assistance from 1 person is allowed. Subjects are classified to following categories: Level 0: no functional ambulation; Level 1: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level II); Level 2: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level I); Level 3: Ambulator-dependent for supervision; Level 4: Ambulator-independent, level surface only; Level 5: Ambulator-independent.

The FAC examines the independence and ambulation of subjects whereby supervision/physical assistance from 1 person is allowed. Subjects are classified to following categories: Level 0: no functional ambulation; Level 1: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level II); Level 2: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level I); Level 3: Ambulator-dependent for supervision; Level 4: Ambulator-independent, level surface only; Level 5: Ambulator-independent.

The FAC examines the independence and ambulation of subjects whereby supervision/physical assistance from 1 person is allowed. Subjects are classified to following categories: Level 0: no functional ambulation; Level 1: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level II); Level 2: Ambulator-dependent for physical assistance (Level I); Level 3: Ambulator-dependent for supervision; Level 4: Ambulator-independent, level surface only; Level 5: Ambulator-independent.

Change in goal attainment T-scores from respective injection cycle baseline visit. GAS measures the extent to which subject's individual goals are achieved in course of intervention. Subject and treating team have to identify 2 personal goals for each treated limb at each injection cycle. Investigator rates the GAS score for each injection cycle. Degree of goal attainment is rated on 5-point scale (-2, -1, 0, +1, +2; study baseline set to -1) and in order to account for interindividual differences in the number of goals, ratings are computed with the Kiresuk formula (Kiresuk \& Sherman, Community Mental Health Journal. 1968;4(6):443-53) resulting in T-scores measuring the degree of goal attainment at each visit. A score of 50 indicates that the individual has reached the expected level of achievement for all goals. The size of change from measurement to measurement indicates incremental change towards or away from goal attainment. Positive values indicate a higher goal attainment.

The Disability Assessment Scale consists of the four domains hygiene, dressing, limb position, and pain which are assessed on a 4-point scale with the values 0 (=no disability), 1 (=mild disability), 2 (=moderate disability), and 3 (=severe disability). One of the domains will be selected per subject per injection cycle. Arithmetic means are built on each patient's target domain value.

The Disability Assessment Scale consists of the four domains hygiene, dressing, limb position, and pain which are assessed on a 4-point scale with the values 0 (=no disability), 1 (=mild disability), 2 (=moderate disability), and 3 (=severe disability). One of the domains will be selected per subject per injection cycle. Arithmetic means are built on each patient's target domain value change.

The Disability Assessment Scale consists of the four domains hygiene, dressing, limb position, and pain which are assessed on a 4-point scale with the values 0 (=no disability), 1 (=mild disability), 2 (=moderate disability), and 3 (=severe disability). One of the domains will be selected per subject per injection cycle. Arithmetic means are built on each patient's target domain value change.

The Disability Assessment Scale consists of the four domains hygiene, dressing, limb position, and pain which are assessed on a 4-point scale with the values 0 (=no disability), 1 (=mild disability), 2 (=moderate disability), and 3 (=severe disability). One of the domains will be selected per subject per injection cycle. Arithmetic means are built on each patient's target domain value change.

Investigator assessment. The global assessment of efficacy will be assessed by the investigator, the subject, and the caregiver using a 4-point Likert scale with the ratings 1 = very good, 2 = good, 3 = moderate, and 4 = poor.

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. It evaluates the general impact of a subject's health in 5 dimensions, i.e., on the ability to perform daily physical activities as well as on pain perception and mood. Each dimension is scored on 1 out of 3 categories specific to each dimension, generally meaning: 1= no problem; 2 = moderate problems; 3 = severe problems.

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. In addition, the subject was to indicate on a visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100, how good or bad their own health was on the examination day (higher values represent better outcome).

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. It evaluates the general impact of a subject's health in 5 dimensions, i.e., on the ability to perform daily physical activities as well as on pain perception and mood. Each dimension is scored on 1 out of 3 categories specific to each dimension, generally meaning: 1= no problem; 2 = moderate problems; 3 = severe problems). In addition, the subject was to indicate on a visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100, how good or bad their own health was on the examination day (higher values indicate better outcome). This table: Frequency -2/-1= improvement by two/one categories; 0 = no change; +1/+2 worsening by one/two categories.

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. In addition, the subject was to indicate on a visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100, how good or bad their own health was on the examination day (higher values represent better outcome).

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. It evaluates the general impact of a subject's health in 5 dimensions, i.e., on the ability to perform daily physical activities as well as on pain perception and mood. Each dimension is scored on 1 out of 3 categories specific to each dimension, generally meaning: 1= no problem; 2 = moderate problems; 3 = severe problems). In addition, the subject was to indicate on a visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100, how good or bad their own health was on the examination day (higher values indicate better outcome). This table: Frequency -2/-1= improvement by two/one categories; 0 = no change; +1/+2 worsening by one/two categories.

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. It evaluates the general impact of a subject's health in 5 dimensions, i.e., on the ability to perform daily physical activities as well as on pain perception and mood. Each dimension is scored on 1 out of 3 categories specific to each dimension, generally meaning: 1= no problem; 2 = moderate problems; 3 = severe problems). In addition, the subject was to indicate on a visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100, how good or bad their own health was on the examination day (higher values indicate better outcome). This table: Positive values indicate improvement

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. It evaluates the general impact of a subject's health in 5 dimensions, i.e., on the ability to perform daily physical activities as well as on pain perception and mood. Each dimension is scored on 1 out of 3 categories specific to each dimension, generally meaning: 1= no problem; 2 = moderate problems; 3 = severe problems). In addition, the subject was to indicate on a visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100, how good or bad their own health was on the examination day (higher values indicate better outcome). This table: Frequency -2/-1= improvement by two/one categories; 0 = no change; +1/+2 worsening by one/two categories.

The EQ-5D is a common quality of life questionnaire to be filled out by the subject. It evaluates the general impact of a subject's health in 5 dimensions, i.e., on the ability to perform daily physical activities as well as on pain perception and mood. Each dimension is scored on 1 out of 3 categories specific to each dimension, generally meaning: 1= no problem; 2 = moderate problems; 3 = severe problems). In addition, the subject was to indicate on a visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100, how good or bad their own health was on the examination day (higher values indicate better outcome). This table: Positive values indicate improvement.