Evaluation of rehabilitation of memory in neurological disabilities (ReMiND): a randomized controlled trial. Treating learning impairments improves memory performance in multiple sclerosis: a randomized clinical trial. Physical rehabilitation has a positive effect on disability in multiple sclerosis patients. Effectiveness of rehabilitation intervention in persons with multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled trial. Effects of a short outpatient rehabilitation treatment on disability of multiple sclerosis patients--a randomised controlled trial. The efficacy of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in stable multiple sclerosis patients.
The evidence for the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation is inconclusive. The aim was to compare the effectiveness of two group memory rehabilitation programmes with a self-help group control.
                Single-blind randomized controlled trial.
                Participants with memory problems following traumatic brain injury, stroke or multiple sclerosis were recruited from community settings.
                Participants were randomly allocated, in cohorts of four, to compensation or restitution group treatment programmes or a self-help group control. All programmes were manual-based and comprised two individual and ten weekly group sessions.
                Memory functions, mood, and activities of daily living were assessed at baseline and five and seven months after randomization.
                There were 72 participants (mean age 47.7, SD 10.2 years; 32 men). There was no significant effect of treatment on the Everyday Memory Questionnaire (P = 0.97). At seven months the mean scores were comparable (restitution 36.6, compensation 41.0, self-help 44.1). However, there was a significant difference between groups on the Internal Memory Aids Questionnaire (P = 0.002). The compensation and restitution groups each used significantly more internal memory aids than the self-help group (P < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups on measures of mood, adjustment and activities of daily living (P > 0.05).
                There results show few statistically significant effects of either compensation or restitution memory group treatment as compared with a self-help group control. Further randomized trials of memory rehabilitation are needed. This randomized clinical trial utilized established techniques to improve new learning and memory performance in multiple sclerosis (MS) participants with learning impairment. Participants were 29 individuals with clinically definite MS with documented learning deficits, randomly assigned to the experimental or control group. The experimental group underwent eight sessions of the Story Memory Technique (SMT), while the control group participated in eight sessions of memory exercises. Neuropsychological assessment was conducted at baseline, immediately following treatment and 5 weeks later to assess outcome. When stratifying participants by degree of learning deficits, a significant treatment effect was noted. MS participants with moderate-severe impairment in learning showed a significant improvement in learning abilities when compared to controls, (t(19) =3.32, P<0.01) evident in 88% of participants in the experimental group. Little improvement was noted in MS participants with mild learning impairments. Significant self-reported improvements in memory were noted in MS participants that underwent treatment, but not those that did not undergo treatment (t(26) =2.55, P<0.01). Results indicate that learning and memory deficits in MS can be effectively treated through a memory rehabilitation program utilizing context and imagery to improve new learning. Appropriate patient selection is important, with moderately-severely impaired individuals showing significantly greater benefit from treatment. Although physical rehabilitation is commonly administered to MS patients, its efficacy has not been established.
                We assessed the efficacy of an inpatient physical rehabilitation program on impairment, disability, and quality of life of MS patients with a randomized, single-blind, controlled trial.
                Fifty ambulatory MS patients were assigned to 3 weeks of inpatient physical rehabilitation (study treatment) or exercises performed at home (control treatment). Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 3, 9, and 15 weeks by a blinded examining physician.
                No changes in impairment occurred in either group, as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale. At the end of the intervention the study group improved significantly in disability, as assessed by the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) motor domain, compared with controls (p = 0.004), and the improvement persisted at 9 weeks (p = 0.001). The effect size statistic was usually large or moderate in all scale scores of the FIM motor domain at 3 weeks and moderate to fair thereafter. The study group also improved in overall health-related quality of life profile compared with controls; however, the difference was significant only for the mental composite score at 3 (p = 0.008) and 9 weeks (p = 0.001).
                Despite unchanging impairment, physical rehabilitation resulted in an improvement in disability and had a positive impact on mental components of health-related quality of life perception at 3 and 9 weeks. A stratified, randomised, waitlist controlled study over 12 months assessed the effectiveness of rehabilitation in persons with multiple sclerosis (MS) in an Australian community cohort.
                Patients with definite MS (n = 101) recruited from a tertiary hospital database, randomised to a treatment group (n = 49) for individualised rehabilitation programme or a control waitlist group (n = 52). Functional Independence Measure (FIM) was used to assess "activity" while the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) and General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28) assessed "participation" and quality of life (QoL). Assessments were at baseline and 12 months.
                Analysis of data from 98 patients (treatment n = 48, control n = 50) showed reduced disability in the treatment group, with statistically significant differences in post-treatment FIM motor scores for the two groups (p<0.001). There was a clinical and statistically significant improvement in FIM (motor) total scores (p<0.001), and the FIM motor domains of: transfer (p<0.001), locomotion (p<0.001), self-care (p<0.001) and the FIM cognitive subscale (p<0.016). In the treated group, 70.8% improved compared with 13% of controls. Significantly more patients in the control group deteriorated over the study period (58.7% vs 16.7%; p<0.001). There were no differences between the control and treatment group scores on the MSIS-physical (p = 0.18), MSIS-psychological (p = 0.45) or GHQ subscales.
                An individualised rehabilitation programme reduces disability in persons with MS compared with no intervention. The impact of rehabilitation on QoL needs further evaluation. More information on the effectiveness of the various components of the multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes are now needed. Australian clinical trials registry: Trials registration number: ACTRNO12605000676617. It is well known that neurorehabilitation can reduce disability or improve handicap of people with multiple sclerosis (MS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a short period (6 weeks) of a tailored, individualised outpatient rehabilitation program in people with progressive MS. A randomised-controlled trial was undertaken in patients with primary and secondary progressive MS referred to the Centro Sclerosi Multipla of Catania. One hundred and eleven patients were assessed at baseline and at 12 weeks with validated measures of disability (Functional Independence Measure (FIM)) and impairment (Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and Functional Systems Scale). Of the 111, 58 were randomly assigned to the treatment group and 53 to the control group. All patients had been previously trained in a home exercise program. Both groups were well matched for age, sex, disease duration and severity, disability and quality of life (Short Form-36). At the end of 6 weeks patients allocated to the rehabilitation treatment group showed significant improvement in their level of disability compared with the control group,while the level of impairment did not change. Thirty-two patients of the treatment group and four of the control group improved on the FIM by two or more steps at 12 weeks (p<0.0001). An improvement by 1 EDSS step occurred in only two patients of the treatment group and in one patient of the control group. Benefits were maintained for a further six weeks. This study demonstrates that a short outpatient rehabilitation treatment improves disability of MS patients, without changing their impairment and confirms the effectiveness of rehabilitation in people with MS. To evaluate the short-term efficacy of multidisciplinary, inpatient rehabilitation of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients.
                A double-blind, randomized, parallel group design was used. The intervention group were offered comprehensive, multidisciplinary inpatient rehabilitation at the Haslev MS Hospital for an average of 35.5 days, while the control group received no treatment related to the study. All patients were examined in their homes twice with a 10-week interval. The rehabilitation of the intervention group started 2-3 weeks after the first examination and ended 2-3 weeks before the second examination. Impairment was assessed by the Multiple Sclerosis Impairment Scale and the Expanded Disability Status Scale. Disability was assessed by means of Guy's Neurological Disability Scale. Two specific scales were used to assess upper limb function and ambulation: The Nine-Hole Peg Test and timed 10-metre walking. Patients' own perception of bodily pain, bladder symptoms, spasticity, fatigue, impaired walking and transfers were recorded using visual analogue scales. Finally, quality of life was assessed using the Life Appreciation and Satisfaction Questionnaire and the Functional Assessment in Multiple Sclerosis.
                Two hundred and thirty-three patients were screened and of those 38 were included for treatment and 52 as controls.
                We found no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any of the outcome measures.
                Although the study was underpowered, the negative outcome exposes the difficulties in quantitative analyses of the efficacy of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, which is liable to confounding factors such as variation in the indication for treatment, in the placebo effect, and in the reliability and responsiveness of the outcome measures.
There is no evidence to support the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation on memory function or functional abilities in patients with MS. However, this conclusion has been arrived because of the limited quality of some of the primary studies reviewed in this area. Further robust, RCTs of higher methodological quality and better quality of reporting are needed.