A clinical reasoning framework for fatigue for neurologic physical therapy

Transcranial direct current stimulation for fatigue in neurological conditions: A systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Fatigue following neurological conditions negatively impacts daily activities, reducing overall quality of life. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for fatigue management is still underexplored. This scoping review explores its use in managing fatigue among various neurological conditions.

METHODS

A thorough literature search was carried out using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, ProQuest, and the Cochrane Library. Google Scholar and clinicaltrials.gov were manually searched for gray literature and ongoing trials, respectively. Regardless of the study design, all studies utilizing tDCS for the management of fatigue in various neurological conditions were considered. Two reviewers independently screened all the studies, following which the data were retrieved.

RESULTS

Studies employing tDCS for fatigue management across neurological conditions is as follows: Multiple sclerosis (MS) (n = 28, 66%), stroke (n = 5, 12%), Parkinson's disease (PD) (n = 4, 10%), post-polio syndrome (PPS) (n = 2, 5%), traumatic brain injury (TBI) (n = 2, 5%), and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (n = 1, 2%). All the studies used anodal stimulation, with the common stimulation site being the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for MS, stroke, and PD. A stimulation intensity of 1.0-4.0 mA with a duration ranging from 15 to 30 min in 1 to 24 sessions were commonly reported. The Fatigue Severity Scale (n = 21) and Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (n = 17) were frequently implemented outcome measures. Regardless of the study design, 36/42 (85.7%) studies reported an improvement in fatigue scores in the tDCS group. The common adverse events noted were tingling (n = 8, 35%), headache (n = 6, 26%), and itching (n = 6, 26%).

DISCUSSION

Application of tDCS for fatigue was explored in individuals with stroke, PD, PPS, and TBI after MS. Even though a wide range of treatment parameters and outcome measures were adopted to assess and target fatigue, tDCS proves to have a promising role in alleviating this symptom.

Self-Report Measures of Fatigue for People With Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The symptom of fatigue impairs function in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Choosing appropriate measures to assess fatigue is challenging. The purpose of this article is to report the findings of a systematic review of patient-reported fatigue measures for people with MS.

METHODS

PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases were searched through January 2020 using terms related to fatigue and MS. Studies were included if the sample size was 30 or more or smaller samples if adequately powered, and if information about measurement characteristics (ie, test-retest reliability, content validity, responsiveness, interpretability, or generalizability) of the measure(s) could be extracted. Study quality was appraised with the 2-point COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Data about measurement characteristics, psychometrics, and clinical utility were extracted and results were synthesized.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles met inclusion criteria with information about 17 patient-reported fatigue measures. No studies had critical methodologic flaws. Measurement characteristic data were not available for all measures. Clinical utility varied in time to complete and fatigue domains assessed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Five measures had data pertaining to all properties of interest. Of these, only the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) had excellent reliability, responsiveness data, no notable ceiling/floor effects, and high clinical utility. We recommend the MFIS for comprehensive measurement and the FSS for screening of subjective fatigue in people with MS.Video Abstract available for more insights from the authors (see the Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, available at: http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A443 ).

The effect of intermittent vs. continuous walking on distance to fatigue in persons with multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE

Previous studies provided evidence that persons with Multiple Sclerosis (pwMS) who walk intermittently experience less fatigue and walk longer distances than when walking continuously. However, total distance pwMS can walk in either condition is unknown. We examined time and distance to fatigability in pwMS comparing intermittent walking (IW) to continuous walking (CW).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

18 pwMS, with Expanded Disability Status Scale median of 4.75 [range = 2-6.5, IQR = 2.5] participated in this randomized crossover study. The IW condition consisted of alternating 30 s treadmill walking and 30 s seated rests. The CW condition consisted of treadmill walking without breaks. Treadmill speed (TS) was determined by an overground 2-min walk test. Walking fatigability was determined by participants walking on the treadmill, until gait fatigue was noted by patient or examiners. Total time and distance to gait fatigue, and subjective fatigue as measured by the Visual analog scale of fatigue were recorded.

RESULTS

Participants had significantly longer duration and distance to fatigue in the IW condition than the CW condition (ps ≤ 0.037). No difference in VASF scores between the two conditions were noted.

CONCLUSION

In this sample, IW allowed pwMS to perform a greater volume of walking and can be an option to improve walking endurance in this population.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONMultiple sclerosis (MS) is a disease that progressively impacts walking, resulting in a decrease in the maximum distance that a person with MS can walk.Intermittent walking has been shown to improve 6-min walk test performance in persons with MS (pwMS) compared to continuous walking, but its effects on longer and shorter walks is not known.The use of distance to fatigue should be considered a viable option for measuring walking fatigability in pwMS as it does not exclude persons based on their ability to complete a 6-min walk, nor would it be too easy for persons with pwMS with mild disability.By using distance to fatigue as an outcome measure, this study provides evidence that intermittent walking results in less fatigability regardless of walking ability.PwMS, regardless of their walking ability, can walk longer distances intermittently than continuously, suggesting that clinical treatment of walking fatigability in pwMS should utilize intermittent rather than continuous walking training.