The efficacy of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in stable multiple sclerosis patients

Objective To evaluate the short-term efficacy of multidisciplinary, inpatient rehabilitation of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. Methods 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. Patients Two hundred and thirty-three patients were screened and of those 38 were included for treatment and 52 as controls. Results We found no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any of the outcome measures. Conclusion 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.

[1]  P. Sørensen,et al.  Responsiveness of the Multiple Sclerosis Impairment Scale in comparison with the Expanded Disability Status Scale , 2005, Multiple sclerosis.

[2]  Alan J. Thompson,et al.  Does neurorehabilitation have a role in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis? , 2003, Journal of Neurology.

[3]  K. Rockwood,et al.  Responsiveness of goal attainment scaling in a randomized controlled trial of comprehensive geriatric assessment. , 2003, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[4]  A. Thompson,et al.  Effects of a short outpatient rehabilitation treatment on disability of multiple sclerosis patients , 2003, Journal of Neurology.

[5]  Francesco PattiMD,et al.  Effects of a short outpatient rehabilitation treatment on disability of multiple sclerosis patients , 2003 .

[6]  K. Fisher,et al.  Goal attainment scaling in evaluating a multidisciplinary pain management programme , 2002, Clinical rehabilitation.

[7]  R G Newcombe,et al.  Controlled randomised crossover trial of the effects of physiotherapy on mobility in chronic multiple sclerosis , 2001, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[8]  B. Sharrack,et al.  The Guy's Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS): a new disability measure for multiple sclerosis , 1999, Multiple sclerosis.

[9]  M. Kaufman,et al.  A controlled investigation of bodywork in multiple sclerosis. , 1999, Journal of alternative and complementary medicine.

[10]  L Mendozzi,et al.  Physical rehabilitation has a positive effect on disability in multiple sclerosis patients , 1999, Neurology.

[11]  D. Mattson,et al.  The measurement of ambulatory impairment in multiple sclerosis , 1997, Neurology.

[12]  A J Thompson,et al.  The impact of inpatient rehabilitation on progressive multiple sclerosis , 1997, Annals of neurology.

[13]  A. Jonsson,et al.  The MS impairment scale: a pragmatic approach to the assessment of impairment in patients with multiple sclerosis , 1997, Multiple sclerosis.

[14]  G. Karabatsos,et al.  Validation of the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis quality of life instrument , 1996, Neurology.

[15]  H. Dickson,et al.  The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study. , 1995, Disability and rehabilitation.

[16]  N. Losseff,et al.  The benefit of inpatient neurorehabilitation in multiple sclerosis , 1995 .

[17]  R. Harwood,et al.  Measuring handicap: the London Handicap Scale, a new outcome measure for chronic disease. , 1994, Quality in health care : QHC.

[18]  C. Granger,et al.  Functional assessment scales: a study of persons with multiple sclerosis. , 1990, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[19]  J. Noseworthy,et al.  Interrater variability with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and Functional Systems (FS) in a multiple sclerosis clinical trial , 1990, Neurology.

[20]  D. Paty,et al.  Scales for rating impairment in multiple sclerosis , 1988, Neurology.

[21]  D. Goodkin,et al.  Upper extremity function in multiple sclerosis: improving assessment sensitivity with box-and-block and nine-hole peg tests. , 1988, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[22]  M. Stineman,et al.  Multiple sclerosis and rehabilitation outcome. , 1987, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[23]  J. Kurtzke Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis , 1983, Neurology.

[24]  Jeff Hebert,et al.  Impact of Aerobic Training on Fitness and Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis. , 2000 .

[25]  J. Hart Extended Outpatient Rehabilitation: Its Influence on Symptom Frequency, Fatigue, and Functional Status for Persons with Progressive Multiple Sclerosis. , 2000 .

[26]  Thomas J. Kiresuk,et al.  Goal Attainment Scaling : applications, theory, and measurement , 1994 .