MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399980575 · doi:10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100353

Canadian Physicians’ Use of Ultrasound in Spasticity Treatment: A National Cross-Sectional Survey

2024· article· en· W4399980575 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Fraser MacRae, Ève Boissonnault, Alto Lo, Heather Finlayson, Paul Winston, Omar Khan, Heather Dow, Farris Kassam, Rajiv Reebye

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Shaver Health and Rehabilitation CentreIsland HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de MontréalWestern University
FundersAbbVie CanadaIpsenMerz Therapeutics
KeywordsSpasticityCross-sectional studyUltrasoundMedicinePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To identify potential barriers and obstacles preventing clinicians from adopting ultrasound for spasticity management. Design: A prospective, cross-sectional national survey. Setting: Web-based platform. Participants: Thirty-six physicians and surgeons from across Canada. Interventions: Survey completion. Main Outcome Measures: The use of ultrasound in clinical spasticity practice, perceived barriers, and risks associated with its implementation. Results: In total, 36 Canadian physicians and surgeons responded. A total of 91% reported using the US in their practice. Nearly all of them used ultrasonography (US) to guide injections and reported using more than 1 guidance technique for their injections. Less than half of the survey respondents reported using the US for muscle architecture assessment or longitudinal evaluation of muscle echo intensity. A total of 47% of survey respondents reported that they believe there are disadvantages associated with US use in spasticity practice. Disadvantages included increased time requirements resulting in discomfort for the injector and patient, the risk of infection after the procedure, and the risk of needle-stick injury. The most important barrier identified was the increased time demands of US compared with other guidance techniques. Other barriers included a lack of feedback on identifying a spastic muscle compared with electrical guidance techniques, a lack of additional remuneration to complete injections under ultrasound guidance, and a lack of adequate training. Conclusions: Future educational efforts should address clinicians' lack of familiarity with US purposes outside of injection guidance. This survey has highlighted the need for a curriculum shift in spasticity education to improve physician's scanning and injection technique, to address concerns about increased time requirements for injecting under ultrasound guidance and to address perceived disadvantages from clinicians.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.215
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical TranslationSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207