CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05432999Updated Mar 25, 2026

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Spasticity in People With Spinal Cord Injury

An interventional study of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy in Spinal Cord Injuries, Spasticity, Muscle and Spastic Paraplegia, sponsored by Kessler Foundation. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-03-25.

Sponsored by Kessler Foundation · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
5
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

People with spinal cord injury (SCI) experience a host of secondary complications that can impact their quality of life and functional independence. One of the more prevalent complications is spasticity, which occurs in response to spinal cord damage and the resulting disruption of motor pathways. Common symptoms include spasms and stiffness, and can occur more than once per hour in many people with SCI. Spasticity can have a negative impact over many quality of life domains, including loss of functional independence, activity limitations, and even employment. Its impact on health domains is also pronounced, with many people who have spasticity reporting mood disorders, depression, pain, sleep disturbances, and contractures. Spasticity can interfere with post-injury rehabilitation and lead to hospitalization. There are many treatments for spasticity in this population. However, many do not have long-term efficacy, and, if they do, they are often pharmacological in nature and carry side effects that could limit function or affect health. The goal of this pilot, randomized-controlled study is to investigate the potential efficacy and safety of a non-invasive treatment with a low side effect profile, extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT). ESWT has shown some benefits in people with post-stroke spasticity with no long term side effects. Thirty individuals with chronic, traumatic SCI will be recruited. Fifteen will be provided with ESWT while the other fifteen will be given a sham treatment. Clinical and self-report measures of spasticity and its impact on quality of life will be collected, as well as quantitative ultrasound measures of muscle architecture and stiffness. The ultimate goal of this pilot project is to collect the data necessary to apply for a larger randomized-controlled trial. Conducting a larger trial will allow for a more powerful estimation of safety and efficacy of ESWT as a treatment for spasticity in people with SCI.

02

Conditions studied

  • Spinal Cord Injuries
  • Spasticity, Muscle
  • Spastic Paraplegia
  • Spastic Quadriplegia
  • Spastic Tetraplegia
  • Paraplegia
  • Tetraplegia

Keywords

  • shockwave
  • extracorporeal shockwave therapy
  • spinal cord injury
  • spasticity
03

In context

Spinal Cord Injuries

1,948 studies on the registry are indexed under Spinal Cord Injuries; 505 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 5 is below the median of 24 across 1,566 interventional studies indexed under Spinal Cord Injuries.

Browse Spinal Cord Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

Kessler Foundation is the lead sponsor of 170 studies on the registry; 58 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  1. 18 years of age or older.
  2. Have a non-progressive traumatic SCI (complete or incomplete) with residual neurological deficits that occurred greater than 1 year prior to their enrollment.
  3. MAS score of 2 or greater in the gastrocnemius of the treated limb.
  4. Can be treated with shockwaves. Contraindications include current or recent (within the past 3 months) infection at the site of treatment and severe coagulopathies (e.g. hemophilia).164
  5. No change in antispasmodic medications within the past three months or intended changes over the course of the trial.
  6. Participant is able and willing to comply with the protocol.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. History of surgical procedures of the lower extremity.
  2. Ankle contracture.
  3. Sever, inflammatory arthritic diseases.
  4. Thrombosis.
  5. Anticoagulant medications.
  6. Pregnancy.
  7. Cancer.
  8. Recent history of local injection of botulinum toxin within 6 months, or phenol/alcohol with 12 months.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
5 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Intervention

    This group will receive a focused extracorporeal shockwave therapy treatment (three applications over three weeks), applied to the spastic medial gastrocnemius.

    Device: Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy

  • Sham comparator
    Control

    This group will go through the same procedures as the intervention group, but the shockwave device will not touch their skin and thus they will receive no therapeutic effect.

    Device: Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy

Interventions

  • DeviceExtracorporeal Shockwave Therapy

    Shockwaves are high pressure sound waves that interact with tissues to elicit a biological response. The shockwave probe will be placed on the skin with ultrasound gel and the muscle will be stimulated for a few minutes.

    Also known as: Storz Medical DUOLITH SD1 Ultra modular system

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Modified Ashworth Scale scores

    The Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) is a physical exam maneuver used frequently both clinically and for research purposes to assess the increase in velocity-dependent muscle tone after neurologic disorders. We will be focusing on the MAS score of the ankle plantar flexors. This measure is included in the NINDS list of CDE recommendations for SCI. Specifically, it evaluates the resistance to passive stretch of the ankle joint through full range of motion.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in Modified Ashworth Scale scores

    The Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) is a physical exam maneuver used frequently both clinically and for research purposes to assess the increase in velocity-dependent muscle tone after neurologic disorders. We will be focusing on the MAS score of the ankle plantar flexors. This measure is included in the NINDS list of CDE recommendations for SCI. Specifically, it evaluates the resistance to passive stretch of the ankle joint through full range of motion.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  2. Change in Modified Tardieu Scale

    The Modified Tardieu Scale (MTS) was developed as a more accurate method to measure spasticity by assessing muscle tone at different velocities. Since its development, it has gone through multiple modifications. The MTS is also included in the NINDS CDE recommendations as a measure of spasticity in people with SCI. The MTS includes two measurements, quality and angle of muscle reaction.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  3. Change in Modified Tardieu Scale

    The Modified Tardieu Scale (MTS) was developed as a more accurate method to measure spasticity by assessing muscle tone at different velocities. Since its development, it has gone through multiple modifications. The MTS is also included in the NINDS CDE recommendations as a measure of spasticity in people with SCI. The MTS includes two measurements, quality and angle of muscle reaction.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  4. Change in Modified Penn Spasticity Frequency Scale

    The Modified Penn Spasticity Frequency Scale (mPSFS) is a self-report scale with two components, which is meant to provide a more complete understanding of an individual's spasticity status. The first component is comprised of a five-point scale, which assesses spasm frequency between 0 ("no spasms") and 4 ("spontaneous spasms occurring more than 10 times per hour"). The second component includes a three-point scale, which assesses spasm severity between 1 ("mild") and 3 ("severe"); this component is not answered if the individual reports no spasms in part one.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  5. Change in Modified Penn Spasticity Frequency Scale

    The Modified Penn Spasticity Frequency Scale (mPSFS) is a self-report scale with two components, which is meant to provide a more complete understanding of an individual's spasticity status. The first component is comprised of a five-point scale, which assesses spasm frequency between 0 ("no spasms") and 4 ("spontaneous spasms occurring more than 10 times per hour"). The second component includes a three-point scale, which assesses spasm severity between 1 ("mild") and 3 ("severe"); this component is not answered if the individual reports no spasms in part one.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  6. Change in Modified Patient-Reported Impact of Spasticity Measure

    The Modified Patient-Reported Impact of Spasticity Measure (mPRISM) is a self-reported instrument with 37 items that assesses the impact of spasticity on health-related quality of life. It is separated into physical, psychological, and social subdomains, making is possible to investigate how spasticity impacts different aspects of quality of life. Each item is rated using a scale of 0 ("never") to 3 ("often to very often").

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  7. Change in Modified Patient-Reported Impact of Spasticity Measure

    The Modified Patient-Reported Impact of Spasticity Measure (mPRISM) is a self-reported instrument with 37 items that assesses the impact of spasticity on health-related quality of life. It is separated into physical, psychological, and social subdomains, making is possible to investigate how spasticity impacts different aspects of quality of life. Each item is rated using a scale of 0 ("never") to 3 ("often to very often").

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  8. Participant Global Impression of Change

    The Participant Global Impression of Change (PGIC, also referred to as the original Guy-Farrar/PGIC scale) is used to measure global treatment effect. It asks the participant to rate, using a 7-point scale (anchored by "very much worse" and "very much improved"), his or her overall impression following treatment as compared to before the treatment. This scale is particularly useful as it provides an indication of clinically important improvement. Although it was designed for and has commonly been used in pain trials, it has been used to assess efficacy of spasticity treatments in people with SCI.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  9. Participant Global Impression of Change

    The Participant Global Impression of Change (PGIC, also referred to as the original Guy-Farrar/PGIC scale) is used to measure global treatment effect. It asks the participant to rate, using a 7-point scale (anchored by "very much worse" and "very much improved"), his or her overall impression following treatment as compared to before the treatment. This scale is particularly useful as it provides an indication of clinically important improvement. Although it was designed for and has commonly been used in pain trials, it has been used to assess efficacy of spasticity treatments in people with SCI.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  10. Medial gastrocnemius muscle echogenicity

    Average "brightness" of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured using quantitative ultrasound techniques.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  11. Medial gastrocnemius muscle echogenicity

    Average "brightness" of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured using quantitative ultrasound techniques.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  12. Medial gastrocnemius muscle elasticity

    Average elasticity of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured using shear wave elastography.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  13. Medial gastrocnemius muscle elasticity

    Average elasticity of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured using shear wave elastography.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  14. Medial gastrocnemius muscle fiber length

    Fiber length of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured quantitatively using ultrasound.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  15. Medial gastrocnemius muscle fiber length

    Fiber length of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured quantitatively using ultrasound.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  16. Medial gastrocnemius muscle thickness

    Thickness of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured quantitatively using ultrasound.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  17. Medial gastrocnemius muscle thickness

    Thickness of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured quantitatively using ultrasound.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

  18. Medial gastrocnemius muscle pennation angle

    Pennation angle of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured quantitatively using ultrasound.

    Time frame: 4 weeks

  19. Medial gastrocnemius muscle pennation angle

    Pennation angle of the medial gastrocnemius muscle, measured quantitatively using ultrasound.

    Time frame: 8 weeks

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Kessler Foundation
    West Orange, New Jersey 07052, United States
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 25, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05432999
Lead sponsor
Kessler Foundation
Responsible party
Nathan Hogaboom, PhD (Research Scientist, Kessler Foundation) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 27, 2022
Start date
Sep 1, 2022
Primary completion
Nov 1, 2025
Completion
Dec 1, 2025
Last update
Mar 25, 2026

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion