Background: Clinical practice, expert opinion, and evidence-based guidelines recommend daily stretching as first-line treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) spasticity, but this has not been evaluated by fully powered clinical trials.
Objective: To determine whether MS Spasticity: Take Control (STC), a guideline-based program of spasticity education and stretching exercises has different effects on the impact of spasticity than a control program of different spasticity education and range of motion (ROM) exercises.
Methods: Ambulatory people with self-reported MS spasticity were randomly assigned to STC or ROM, delivered in same duration, facilitator-led, group classes, face-to-face (F2F) initially and later virtually, due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Multiple Sclerosis Spasticity Scale (MSSS) scores were compared between groups at 1 (primary outcome) and 6 months after interventions.
Results: A total of 231 people enrolled. There was no significant difference in MSSS scores between STC and ROM at 1 month (mean difference = 0.28, 95% (confidence interval (CI)) = [-9.45 to 10.01], p = 0.955). There were significant group mean improvements in MSSS scores and most other outcomes at 1 and 6 months.
Conclusion: Education with stretching exercises, the first-line recommended treatment for MS spasticity, and education with ROM exercises may both improve MS spasticity to a similar degree. This study debunks the belief that stretching is essential to managing MS spasticity.
Keywords: Spasticity; exercise; rehabilitation; stretching; symptom management.