Evaluation of NeuroPage as a memory aid for people with multiple sclerosis: A randomised controlled trial

Tablet app-based dexterity training in multiple sclerosis (TAD-MS): a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Mobile health applications (mHealth apps) may lead to health benefits. In recent years, the use of apps in multiple sclerosis (MS) has increased. Apps to train and improve dexterity in MS are scarce. This study investigated the effectiveness of a tablet app-based home-based training to improve dexterity in individuals with MS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial, two standardized 4-week home-based interventions focussing on different aspects of dexterity and upper limb function were compared. Assessments were done at baseline, post-intervention and 12-week follow-up. The primary endpoint was the Arm Function in Multiple Sclerosis Questionnaire, a dexterity-related measure of patient-reported activities of daily living. Secondary endpoints were dexterous function, grip strength and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Forty-eight individuals were randomly assigned to a tablet app-based program (n = 26) or a control strengthening exercise program (n = 22). No significant differences were found for the primary endpoint (p = 0.35). Some significant differences in favour of the app-group were found in fine coordinated finger movements and strength. No significant differences were found at the 12-week follow-up for all endpoints. Adherence in both groups was above 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

App-based training was not superior compared to a control strengthening exercise program concerning the arm- and hand function from the participant's perspective. However, app-based training was found to be effective in improving specific dimensions (finger movements and strength), and can easily be applied at home. Therefore, individuals living with MS with impaired dexterity should consider app-based training.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03369470.

Mobile health interventions in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Persons with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) might be particularly well suited to benefit from digital health applications because they are, on average, younger and less severely disabled than patients with many other chronic diseases. Many digital health applications for pwMS have been developed.

OBJECTIVES

Analysis of the evidence of digital health applications to improve health outcomes from a patient perspective.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed on all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have studied mobile health interventions for pwMS, that is, which can be applied with a smartphone, tablet, or laptop to improve patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 1127 articles identified in the literature search, 13 RCTs fit the inclusion criteria. Two trials studied messaging systems, two depression interventions, one addressed MS fatigue, five cognition, and three mobility issues, of which two focused on spasticity management. One trial aimed to enhance physical activity. Most were pilot studies that cannot yield definitive conclusions regarding efficacy. One depression intervention and one fatigue intervention showed significant results across several outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Several mobile self-guided digital health applications for pwMS have been tested in RCTs, and two interventions targeting depression and fatigue have demonstrated significant effects. Challenges remain regarding implementation into routine care.

Mapping two decades of multiple sclerosis rehabilitation trials: A systematic scoping review and call to action to advance the study of race and ethnicity in rehabilitation research

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS), is prevalent across many racial and ethnic groups, and disproportionately impacts racially minoritized populations. Rehabilitation interventions are an important component of comprehensive MS care. Yet, we do not know the extent to which MS rehabilitation trials consider race and ethnicity in defining eligibility criteria, planning recruitment strategies, selecting outcome measures, supporting intervention delivery, and designing approaches to promote adherence and retention.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of five databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, and Web of Science) to locate randomized controlled rehabilitation trials published from January 2002 to March 2022. We extracted data from relevant studies, assessed their methodological quality, and narratively summarized results. Reporting of this review is in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).

RESULTS

Fifty-six studies of neurorehabilitation (n = 3), cognitive rehabilitation (n = 6), exercise training (n = 9) and self-management (n = 38) interventions were included in this review. The studies were predominantly from North America (n = 44; 73%) or Europe (n = 12; 20%) and included 4280 participants. Most participants (n = 3669; 86%) were Caucasians. Less than 10% of participants were Black (n = 282), Latinx/Hispanic (n = 60), Asian (n = 46), Indigenous (n = 7), or Arab (n = 2). Few studies discussed how race and/or ethnicity were considered in trial planning or execution.

CONCLUSIONS

Without consistent and systematic attention to race and ethnicity, both in terms of trial design and reporting, it is impossible to know how MS rehabilitation interventions will translate into real-world applications. This call to action - to the MS rehabilitation research community to ensure trial and intervention processes that accommodate the needs of diverse racial and ethnic groups - is an important first step in addressing inequities in rehabilitation care for persons with MS.

Assessment and Management of Cognitive and Psychosocial Difficulties for People with Multiple Sclerosis in Ireland: A National Survey of Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

A recent survey of 109 healthcare professionals explored how UK healthcare professionals typically assess and treat multiple sclerosis (MS)-related cognitive impairment. Little is currently known about what constitutes usual care for cognitive impairment and psychosocial care for people with MS in Ireland.

AIM

The aim of the current research was to survey healthcare professionals (HCPs) who work with people with MS, to understand current assessment and management of cognition and psychosocial care in people with MS in the Republic of Ireland.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey design was used. Data were collected online through Microsoft forms and through postal responses. The original UK questionnaire was adapted, piloted, and distributed to Irish HCPs. Participants were qualified HCPs who work clinically with people with MS in the Republic of Ireland.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight HCPs completed the survey. Only 34% of those surveyed reported routine screening of cognition for people with MS within their services; approximately, 36% HCPs reported that they did not provide information or services in relation to cognition to people with MS and 39% reported not referring elsewhere when cognitive difficulties were suspected. Out of the 98 HCPs, 47% reported assessing mood difficulties as part of their services, with 14% unsure. In total, 70% of participants reported onward referral took place if mood difficulties were identified. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment was the most commonly administrated cognitive assessment. Cognitive intervention choices were found to be guided by clinical judgement in 75.5% of cases. Discussion. Despite the high importance placed on cognitive and psychosocial care, there is very little consistency in treatment and assessment across services for people with MS in Ireland.

Memory rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Problems with cognition, particularly memory, are common in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and can affect their ability to complete daily activities and can negatively affect quality of life. Over the last few years, there has been considerable growth in the number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of memory rehabilitation in MS. To guide clinicians and researchers, this review provides an overview of the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation for people with MS.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether people with MS who received memory rehabilitation compared to those who received no treatment, or an active control showed better immediate, intermediate, or longer-term outcomes in their: 1. memory functions, 2. other cognitive abilities, and 3. functional abilities, in terms of activities of daily living, mood, and quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL which includes Clinicaltrials.gov, World Health Organization (The Whoqol) International Clinical Trials Registry Portal, Embase and PubMed (MEDLINE), and the following electronic databases (6 September 2020): CINAHL, LILACS, the NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio database, The Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, PsycINFO, and CAB Abstracts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs or quasi-RCTs of memory rehabilitation or cognitive rehabilitation for people with MS in which a memory rehabilitation treatment group was compared with a control group. Selection was conducted independently first and then confirmed through group discussion. We excluded studies that included participants whose memory deficits were the result of conditions other than MS, unless we could identify a subgroup of participants with MS with separate results.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eight review authors were involved in this update in terms of study selection, quality assessment, data extraction and manuscript review. We contacted investigators of primary studies for further information where required. We conducted data analysis and synthesis in accordance with Cochrane methods. We performed a 'best evidence' synthesis based on the methodological quality of the primary studies included. Outcomes were considered separately for 'immediate' (within the first month after completion of intervention), 'intermediate' (one to six months), and 'longer-term' (more than six months) time points.

MAIN RESULTS

We added 29 studies during this update, bringing the total to 44 studies, involving 2714 participants. The interventions involved various memory retraining techniques, such as computerised programmes and training on using internal and external memory aids. Control groups varied in format from assessment-only groups, discussion and games, non-specific cognitive retraining, and attention or visuospatial training. The risk of bias amongst the included studies was generally low, but we found eight studies to have high risk of bias related to certain aspects of their methodology. In this abstract, we are only reporting outcomes at the intermediate timepoint (i.e., between one and six months). We found a slight difference between groups for subjective memory (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.35; 11 studies; 1045 participants; high-quality evidence) and quality of life (SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.58; 6 studies; 683 participants; high-quality evidence) favoring the memory rehabilitation group. There was a small difference between groups for verbal memory (SMD 0.25, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.40; 6 studies; 753 participants; low-quality evidence) and information processing (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.54; 8 studies; 933 participants; low-quality evidence), favoring the memory rehabilitation group.  We found little to no difference between groups for visual memory (SMD 0.20, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.50; 6 studies; 751 participants; moderate-quality evidence), working memory (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.40; 8 studies; 821 participants; moderate-quality evidence), or activities of daily living (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.24; 4 studies; 400 participants; high-quality evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to support the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation on some outcomes assessed in this review at intermediate follow-up. The evidence suggests that memory rehabilitation results in between-group differences favoring the memory rehabilitation group at the intermediate time point for subjective memory, verbal memory, information processing, and quality of life outcomes, suggesting that memory rehabilitation is beneficial and meaningful to people with MS. There are differential effects of memory rehabilitation based on the quality of the trials, with studies of high risk of bias inflating (positive) outcomes. Further robust, large-scale, multi-centre RCTs, with better quality reporting, using ecologically valid outcome assessments (including health economic outcomes) assessed at longer-term time points are still needed to be certain about the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation in people with MS.

Mobile health (mHealth) usage, barriers, and technological considerations in persons with multiple sclerosis: a literature review

OBJECTIVES

Persons with multiple sclerosis (MS) can face a number of potential healthcare-related barriers, for which mobile health (mHealth) technology can be potentially beneficial. This review aimed to understand the frequency, current uses, and potential barriers with mHealth usage among persons with MS.

METHODS

A query string was used to identify articles on PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and IEEE Xplore that were published in English between January 2010 and December 2019. Abstracts were reviewed and selected based on a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. Fifty-nine peer-reviewed research studies related to the study questions are summarized.

RESULTS

The majority of persons with MS were reported as using smartphones, although rates of mHealth utilization varied widely. mHealth usage was grouped into 3 broad categories: (1) disability and symptom measurement; (2) interventions and symptom management; and (3) tracking and promoting adherence. While there have been an increasing number of mHealth options, certain limitations associated with MS (eg, poor dexterity, memory problems) may affect usage, although including persons with MS in the design process can address some of these issues.

DISCUSSION

Given the increased attention to mHealth in this population and the current need for telehealth and at home devices, it is important that persons with MS and healthcare providers are involved in the development of new mHealth tools to ensure that the end product meets their needs. Considerations for addressing the potential mHealth use barriers in persons with MS are discussed.

Group cognitive rehabilitation to reduce the psychological impact of multiple sclerosis on quality of life: the CRAMMS RCT

BACKGROUND

People with multiple sclerosis have problems with memory and attention. The effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a cognitive rehabilitation programme for people with multiple sclerosis.

DESIGN

This was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in which participants were randomised in a ratio of 6 : 5 to receive cognitive rehabilitation plus usual care or usual care alone. Participants were assessed at 6 and 12 months after randomisation.

SETTING

The trial was set in hospital neurology clinics and community services.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were people with multiple sclerosis who had cognitive problems, were aged 18-69 years, could travel to attend group sessions and gave informed consent.

INTERVENTION

The intervention was a group cognitive rehabilitation programme delivered weekly by an assistant psychologist to between four and six participants for 10 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale - Psychological subscale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included results from the Everyday Memory Questionnaire, the 30-Item General Health Questionnaire, the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version and a service use questionnaire from participants, and the Everyday Memory Questionnaire - relative version and the Modified Carer Strain Index from a relative or friend of the participant.

RESULTS

Of the 449 participants randomised, 245 were allocated to cognitive rehabilitation (intervention group) and 204 were allocated to usual care (control group). Of these, 214 in the intervention group and 173 in the control group were included in the primary analysis. There was no clinically important difference in the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale - Psychological subscale score between the two groups at the 12-month follow-up (adjusted difference in means -0.6, 95% confidence interval -1.5 to 0.3; p = 0.20). There were no important differences between the groups in relation to cognitive abilities, fatigue, employment, or carer strain at follow-up. However, there were differences, although small, between the groups in the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale - Psychological subscale score at 6 months (adjusted difference in means -0.9, 95% confidence interval -1.7 to -0.1; p = 0.03) and in everyday memory on the Everyday Memory Questionnaire as reported by participants at 6 (adjusted difference in means -5.3, 95% confidence interval -8.7 to -1.9) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means -4.4, 95% confidence interval -7.8 to -0.9) and by relatives at 6 (adjusted difference in means -5.4, 95% confidence interval -9.1 to -1.7) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means -5.5, 95% confidence interval -9.6 to -1.5) in favour of the cognitive rehabilitation group. There were also differences in mood on the 30-Item General Health Questionnaire at 6 (adjusted difference in means -3.4, 95% confidence interval -5.9 to -0.8) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means -3.4, 95% confidence interval -6.2 to -0.6) in favour of the cognitive rehabilitation group. A qualitative analysis indicated perceived benefits of the intervention. There was no evidence of a difference in costs (adjusted difference in means -£574.93, 95% confidence interval -£1878.93 to £729.07) or quality-adjusted life-year gain (adjusted difference in means 0.00, 95% confidence interval -0.02 to 0.02). No safety concerns were raised and no deaths were reported.

LIMITATIONS

The trial included a sample of participants who had relatively severe cognitive problems in daily life. The trial was not powered to perform subgroup analyses. Participants could not be blinded to treatment allocation.

CONCLUSIONS

This cognitive rehabilitation programme had no long-term benefits on quality of life for people with multiple sclerosis.

FUTURE WORK

Future research should evaluate the selection of those who may benefit from cognitive rehabilitation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN09697576.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 4. See the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library website for further project information.

Electronic Health Interventions in the Case of Multiple Sclerosis: From Theory to Practice

(1) Background: eHealth interventions play a growing role in shaping the future healthcare system. The integration of eHealth interventions can enhance the efficiency and quality of patient management and optimize the course of treatment for chronically ill patients. In this integrative review, we discuss different types of interventions, standards and advantages of quality eHealth approaches especially for people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). (2) Methods: The electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched to identify potential articles for eHealth interventions in pwMS; based on 62 articles, we consider different ways of implementing health information technology with various designs. (3) Results: There already exist some eHealth interventions for single users with a single-use case, interventions with a social setting, as well as eHealth interventions that integrate various single and social interventions and even those that may be used additionally for complex use cases. A key determinant of consumer acceptance is a high-quality user-centric design for healthcare practitioners and pwMS. In pwMS, the different neurological disabilities should be considered, and particular attention must be paid to the course of the treatment and the safety processes of each treatment option. (4) Conclusion: Depending on the field of application and the respective users, interventions are designed for single, social, integrated or complex use. In order to be accepted by their target group, interventions must be beneficial and easy to use.

Clinical and cost effectiveness of memory rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury: a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of a group-based memory rehabilitation programme for people with traumatic brain injury.

DESIGN

Multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial in England.

SETTING

Community.

PARTICIPANTS

People with memory problems following traumatic brain injury, aged 18-69 years, able to travel to group sessions, communicate in English, and give consent.

INTERVENTIONS

A total of 10 weekly group sessions of manualized memory rehabilitation plus usual care (intervention) vs. usual care alone (control).

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was the patient-reported Everyday Memory Questionnaire (EMQ-p) at six months post randomization. Secondary outcomes were assessed at 6 and 12 months post randomization.

RESULTS

We randomized 328 participants. There were no clinically important differences in the primary outcome between arms at six-month follow-up (mean EMQ-p score: 38.8 (SD 26.1) in intervention and 44.1 (SD 24.6) in control arms, adjusted difference in means: -2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI): -6.7 to 2.5, p = 0.37) or 12-month follow-up. Objectively assessed memory ability favoured the memory rehabilitation arm at the 6-month, but not at the 12-month outcome. There were no between-arm differences in mood, experience of brain injury, or relative/friend assessment of patient's everyday memory outcomes, but goal attainment scores favoured the memory rehabilitation arm at both outcome time points. Health economic analyses suggested that the intervention was unlikely to be cost effective. No safety concerns were raised.

CONCLUSION

This memory rehabilitation programme did not lead to reduced forgetting in daily life for a heterogeneous sample of people with traumatic brain injury. Further research will need to examine who benefits most from such interventions.

Creating a digital memory notebook application for individuals with mild cognitive impairment to support everyday functioning

Purpose: Memory impairment can necessitate use of external memory aids to preserve functional independence. As external aids can be difficult to learn and remember to use, technology may improve the efficacy of current rehabilitation strategies. We detail the iterative development of a digital application of a paper-and-pencil memory notebook.Methods: Twenty participants (aged 54+) of varying levels of cognitive ability were recruited for four iterations of usability testing (five participants per iteration). Each participant completed a series of tasks using the digital memory notebook (DMN), followed by questionnaires that assessed satisfaction (Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction) and usability ratings (Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire) for the application.Results and Conclusions: Between Iterations 2 and 5, participants demonstrated marked reductions in time to complete several types of tasks (e.g., add event, navigate interface) using the DMN. Participants in Iteration 5 also rated all subscales of both the usability and satisfaction questionnaires very highly. Faster task completion times were correlated with more favourable system ratings. However, neither task performance times nor system ratings were correlated with cognitive abilities, scheduling tool use or comfort with technology. Both the questionnaire and performance-based data indicate the final iteration of the DMN was easy to use. Furthermore, the application was user-friendly despite individual differences in cognitive ability, familiarity with scheduling tools and comfort with technology. Future work will demonstrate whether the DMN will support everyday retrospective and prospective memory lapses and increase the functional independence and quality of life for persons with cognitive impairment.Implications for rehabilitationBuilding on practice standards and user-centred design, the digital memory notebook (DMN) application is an "all-in-one" memory aid and organizational tool with an intuitive interface designed to help improve everyday functioning.The DMN's today page, to do list and calendar functions can support everyday prospective and retrospective memory abilities.The DMN's notes, journaling and motivational functions can support longer-term goal planning and mood management.The DMN's alarm functions can support learning to use the DMN and serve as reminders to support prospective memory and aid in activity completion.