7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Multimodal agility-based exercise training (MAT) versus strength and endurance training (SET) to improve multiple sclerosis-related fatigue and fatigability during inpatient rehabilitation: a randomized controlled pilot and feasibility study [ReFEx]

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Multimodal agility-based exercise training (MAT) is a group-based exercise training framework for persons with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) with a potential to impact fatigue and fatigability. In a mixed-methods design, this study evaluated the feasibility of implementing MAT in an inpatient rehabilitation setting and the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) study protocol with ‘traditional’ strength and endurance training (SET) as an active control condition. Secondarily, preliminary outcome data was acquired.

          Methods

          PwMS with low to moderate disability and self-reported fatigue were randomly allocated to either MAT or SET when starting inpatient rehabilitation (4–6 weeks). The MAT-participants exercised in a group following a MAT-manual (sessions were gym- (5x/week) and pool-based (3x/week)). SET-participants exercised individually 5x/week on a cycle ergometer, and 3x/week on strength training machines. Feasibility assessments focused on processes, resources, management, time, and scientific domains. Assessed clinical outcomes at admission and discharge included perceived fatigue, motor and cognitive fatigability, cognitive performance, motor function, and balance confidence. Perceived fatigue was reassessed 1, 4, and 12 weeks after discharge. Feasibility was determined regarding predetermined progression criteria.

          Results

          Twenty-two participants were randomized. Both groups performed the minimum number of sessions (> 18), and retention was adequate (73–91%). SET-participants performed more sessions than MAT-participants (30.8 vs. 22.7) and stayed longer in the facility (34.2 vs. 31.6 days). Non-eligibility of admitted pwMS was high (74% non-eligible), mainly due to high EDSS and inability to attend pool-based sessions. Consequently, recruitment (1.8/month) was slower than the predetermined progression criterium. Baseline assessments took longer than required (only 50% completed within 3 days). Short-term fatigue reduction was similar for both groups. Motor fatigability also improved in both groups, whereas cognitive fatigability deteriorated. In MAT, average improvement in walking endurance (43.9 m) exceeded minimal important change values for individuals (> 26.9 m).

          Conclusions

          Progressing to a definitive RCT necessitates adaptation of eligibility criteria. In the present design it will also be difficult to attain similar dosing of interventions. A multicenter RCT focused only on gym-based MAT might be another option to assess the effect of MAT. The primary outcome measure should be able to measure change in perceived fatigue more robustly.

          Trial registration

          German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00023943, date of registration: 23 September 2021.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12883-023-03436-8.

          Related collections

          Most cited references56

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria

          The 2010 McDonald criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis are widely used in research and clinical practice. Scientific advances in the past 7 years suggest that they might no longer provide the most up-to-date guidance for clinicians and researchers. The International Panel on Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis reviewed the 2010 McDonald criteria and recommended revisions. The 2017 McDonald criteria continue to apply primarily to patients experiencing a typical clinically isolated syndrome, define what is needed to fulfil dissemination in time and space of lesions in the CNS, and stress the need for no better explanation for the presentation. The following changes were made: in patients with a typical clinically isolated syndrome and clinical or MRI demonstration of dissemination in space, the presence of CSF-specific oligoclonal bands allows a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis; symptomatic lesions can be used to demonstrate dissemination in space or time in patients with supratentorial, infratentorial, or spinal cord syndrome; and cortical lesions can be used to demonstrate dissemination in space. Research to further refine the criteria should focus on optic nerve involvement, validation in diverse populations, and incorporation of advanced imaging, neurophysiological, and body fluid markers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis

            Accurate clinical course descriptions (phenotypes) of multiple sclerosis (MS) are important for communication, prognostication, design and recruitment of clinical trials, and treatment decision-making. Standardized descriptions published in 1996 based on a survey of international MS experts provided purely clinical phenotypes based on data and consensus at that time, but imaging and biological correlates were lacking. Increased understanding of MS and its pathology, coupled with general concern that the original descriptors may not adequately reflect more recently identified clinical aspects of the disease, prompted a re-examination of MS disease phenotypes by the International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of MS. While imaging and biological markers that might provide objective criteria for separating clinical phenotypes are lacking, we propose refined descriptors that include consideration of disease activity (based on clinical relapse rate and imaging findings) and disease progression. Strategies for future research to better define phenotypes are also outlined.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how

              Pilot studies for phase III trials - which are comparative randomized trials designed to provide preliminary evidence on the clinical efficacy of a drug or intervention - are routinely performed in many clinical areas. Also commonly know as "feasibility" or "vanguard" studies, they are designed to assess the safety of treatment or interventions; to assess recruitment potential; to assess the feasibility of international collaboration or coordination for multicentre trials; to increase clinical experience with the study medication or intervention for the phase III trials. They are the best way to assess feasibility of a large, expensive full-scale study, and in fact are an almost essential pre-requisite. Conducting a pilot prior to the main study can enhance the likelihood of success of the main study and potentially help to avoid doomed main studies. The objective of this paper is to provide a detailed examination of the key aspects of pilot studies for phase III trials including: 1) the general reasons for conducting a pilot study; 2) the relationships between pilot studies, proof-of-concept studies, and adaptive designs; 3) the challenges of and misconceptions about pilot studies; 4) the criteria for evaluating the success of a pilot study; 5) frequently asked questions about pilot studies; 7) some ethical aspects related to pilot studies; and 8) some suggestions on how to report the results of pilot investigations using the CONSORT format.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                florian.wolf@go.johanniter-kliniken.de
                Journal
                BMC Neurol
                BMC Neurol
                BMC Neurology
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2377
                28 October 2023
                28 October 2023
                2023
                : 23
                : 388
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Neurological Rehabilitation Center Godeshoehe GmbH, Bonn, Germany
                [2 ]GRID grid.5675.1, ISNI 0000 0001 0416 9637, Division of Performance and Health, Institute for Sport and Sport Science, , Technical University Dortmund, ; Dortmund, Germany
                [3 ]GRID grid.6190.e, ISNI 0000 0000 8580 3777, Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies, Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, , University of Cologne, ; Cologne, Germany
                Article
                3436
                10.1186/s12883-023-03436-8
                10612282
                37898772
                65321076-928d-42ea-9435-087a3ce6e894
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 1 June 2023
                : 16 October 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100008752, Deutsche Sporthochschule Köln;
                Award ID: L-11-10011-238-102000
                Funded by: Förderverein NRZ Bonn e.V.
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Neurology
                agility,exercise,fatigue,multiple sclerosis,rehabilitation
                Neurology
                agility, exercise, fatigue, multiple sclerosis, rehabilitation

                Comments

                Comment on this article