4.5 Article

Neuropsychological rehabilitation has beneficial effects on perceived cognitive deficits in multiple sclerosis during nine-month follow-up

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 334, Issue 1-2, Pages 154-160

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2013.08.017

Keywords

Attention; Follow-up; Long-term; Multiple sclerosis; MS; Neuropsychological rehabilitation

Funding

  1. Social Insurance Institution of Finland

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Systematic reviews have indicated a low level of evidence for the positive effects of neuropsychological and cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis (MS). How permanent the positive effects are, is unknown. Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether short-term neuropsychological rehabilitation has long-term beneficial effects in a nine-month follow-up. Methods: 102 relapsing remitting MS patients with subjective and objective attentional deficits were randomized into intervention and control groups. Altogether 78 out of 102 patients (76%) completed the longitudinal follow-up (intervention group 83%, control group 67%). Intervention group received strategy-oriented neuropsychological rehabilitation conducted once a week in 60-minute sessions during thirteen consecutive weeks. The control group received no intervention. Cognitive deficits, mood, fatigue, impact of disease, and quality of life were evaluated with self-reports at baseline, six months, and one year from baseline. Results: The positive effects of neuropsychological rehabilitation on perceived cognitive deficits were maintained for nine months. Among a subgroup of patients with moderate to severe attentional deficits, positive rehabilitation outcome was even more evident. Conclusion: The beneficial effects of strategy-oriented neuropsychological rehabilitation on perceived cognitive deficits in MS may be maintained for at least one year after the beginning of the intervention. (C) 2013 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