4.5 Article

The association between cognitive impairment and quality of life in patients with early multiple sclerosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 290, Issue 1-2, Pages 75-79

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2009.11.004

Keywords

Multiple sclerosis; Clinically isolated syndrome; Quality of life; Cognition disorder

Funding

  1. Nancy Davis Foundation for Multiple Sclerosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cognitive deficits are common in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and may be observed early in the course of the disease. Current knowledge about the association between cognitive impairment and health-related quality of life (HQOL) in patients with early MS is limited. We used a well-established battery of cognitive tests and standardized HQOL measures to examine the associations between overall and domain-specific cognitive performance and quality of life in patients with early MS. Ninety-two patients with CIS or MS diagnosed in the previous three years participating in the CLIMB Natural History Study underwent a neurologic examination, neuropsychological evaluation and quality of life assessment. Associations between cognitive scores and HQOL measures were examined. There were no differences between cognitively impaired versus unimpaired subjects on any of the HQOL measures. After controlling for depression, scores on tests of information processing speed were significantly associated with several measures of HQOL including physical well-being, fatigue, and social support. In all cases, correlations between HQOL and cognitive measures were mild. These findings were observed in patients with limited cognitive impairment and minimal physical disability. Our results suggest that cognitive remediation programs aimed at improving cognitive skills may also improve quality of life for patients with early MS. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available