To determine the quantity and quality of description of cognitive rehabilitation for cognitive deficits in people with multiple sclerosis, using a variety of published checklists, and suggest ways of improving the reporting of these interventions.
Data sources:
A total of 10 electronic databases were searched, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO, from inception to May 2017. Grey literature databases, trial registers, reference lists and author citations were also searched.
Review methods:
Papers were included if participants were people with multiple sclerosis aged 18 years and over and if the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation in improving functional ability for memory, attention or executive dysfunction, with or without a control group, was being evaluated.
Results:
A total of 54 studies were included in this review. The reporting of a number of key aspects of cognitive rehabilitation was poor. This was particularly in relation to content of interventions (reported completely in 26 of the 54 studies), intervention procedures (reported completely in 16 of the 54 studies), delivery mode (reported completely in 24 of the 54 studies) and intervention mechanism of action (reported completely in 21 of the 54 studies).
Conclusion:
The quality of reporting of cognitive rehabilitation for memory, attention and executive function for multiple sclerosis, across a range of study designs, is poor. Existing reporting checklists do not adequately cover aspects relevant to cognitive rehabilitation, such as the approaches used to address cognitive deficits. Future checklists could consider these aspects we have identified in this review.
CarrSEdas NairRSchwartzAFet al. Group memory rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis: a feasibility randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2014; 28: 552–561.
2.
StuifbergenAKBeckerHPerezFet al. A randomized controlled trial of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention for persons with multiple sclerosis. Clin Rehabil2012; 26: 882–893.
3.
HildebrandtHLanzMHahnHKet al. Cognitive training in MS: effects and relation to brain atrophy. Restor Neurol Neurosci2007; 25: 33–43.
4.
SolariAMottaAMendozziLet al. Computer-aided retraining of memory and attention in people with multiple sclerosis: a randomized, double-blind controlled trial. J Neurol Sci2004; 222: 99–104.
BeerSKhanFKesselringJ.Rehabilitation interventions in multiple sclerosis: an overview. J Neurol2012; 259: 1994–2008.
9.
DijkersMP.Reporting on interventions: issues and guidelines for rehabilitation researchers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2015; 96: 1170–1180.
10.
MichieSFixsenDGrimshawJMet al. Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method. Implement Sci2009; 4: 40.
11.
van HeugtenCWolters GregórioGWadeD. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation after acquired brain injury: a systematic review of content of treatment. Neuropsychol Rehabil2012; 22: 653–673.
12.
MartinKJSinclairEJdas NairR.Descriptions of memory rehabilitation group interventions for neurological conditions: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil2015; 30: 705–713.
13.
HoffmannTCGlasziouPPBoutronIet al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ2014; 348: g1687.
14.
MitoloMVenneriAWilkinsonIDet al. Cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. J Neurol Sci2015; 354: 1–9.
15.
ChiaravallotiNDDeLucaJ.Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol2008; 7: 1139–1151.
16.
RaoSLeoGEllingtonLet al. Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. II. Impact on employment and social functioning. Neurology1991; 41: 692–696.
17.
GuimarãesJSáMJ.Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Front Neurol2012; 24: 74.
18.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJet al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med2009; 6: e1000097.
19.
ArnettPAStroberLB.Cognitive and neurobehavioral features in multiple sclerosis. Expert Rev Neurother2011; 11: 411–424.
20.
VandenBosGRGasqueAWJacksonP.Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. 6th ed.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2010.
21.
ConnVS.Unpacking the black box countering the problem of inadequate intervention descriptions in research reports. West J Nurs Res2012; 34: 427–433.
AllenDNGoldsteinGHeymanRAet al. Teaching memory strategies to persons with multiple sclerosis. J Rehabil Res Dev1998; 35: 405–410.
24.
ErnstABotzungAGounotDet al. Induced brain plasticity after a facilitation programme for autobiographical memory in multiple sclerosis: a preliminary study. Mult Scler Int2012; 2012: 820240.
25.
ErnstABlancFVoltzenlogelVet al. Autobiographical memory in multiple sclerosis patients: assessment and cognitive facilitation. Neuropsychol Rehabil2013; 23: 161–181.
26.
GentryT.PDAs as cognitive aids for people with multiple sclerosis. Am J Occup Ther2008; 62: 18–27.
27.
PedullaLBrichettoGTacchinoAet al. Adaptive vs. non-adaptive cognitive training by means of a personalized App: a randomized trial in people with multiple sclerosis. J Neuro Eng Rehabil2016; 13: 88.
28.
VogtAKapposLCalabresePet al. Working memory training in patients with multiple sclerosis – comparison of two different training schedules. Restor Neurol Neurosci2009; 27: 225–235.
29.
ChiaravallotiNDWylieGLeavittVet al. Increased cerebral activation after behavioral treatment for memory deficits in MS. J Neurol2012; 259: 1337–1346.
30.
MartinKJLincolnNdas NairR.Group-based memory rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis: subgroup analysis of the ReMIND trial. Int J Ther Rehabil2014; 21: 590–596.
31.
AmatoMPGorettiBViterboRGet al. Computer-assisted rehabilitation of attention in patients with multiple sclerosis: results of a randomized, double-blind trial. Mult Scler2014; 20: 91–98.
32.
CerasaAGioiaMCValentinoPet al. Computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation of attention deficits for multiple sclerosis: a randomized trial with fMRI correlates. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2013; 27: 284–295.
33.
PlohmannAKapposLBrunnschweilerH.Evaluation of a computer-based attention retraining program for patients with multiple sclerosis. Schweiz Arch Neurol Psychiatr1994; 145: 35–36.
34.
PlohmannAMKapposLAmmannWet al. Computer assisted retraining of attentional impairments in patients with multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1998; 64: 455–462.
35.
BirnboimSMillerA.Cognitive rehabilitation for multiple sclerosis patients with executive dysfunction. J Cognit Rehabil2004; 22: 11–18.
36.
FinkFRischkauEButtMet al. Efficacy of an executive function intervention programme in MS: a placebo-controlled and pseudo-randomized trial. Mult Scler2010; 16: 1148–1151.
37.
HanssenKTBeiskeAGLandroNIet al. Cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Neurol Scand2015; 133: 30–40.
38.
AltunGIKirbasDAltunDUet al. The effects of cognitive rehabilitation on relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Noro Psikiyatr Ars2015; 52: 174–179.
39.
BonavitaSSaccoRDella CorteMet al. Computer-aided cognitive rehabilitation improves cognitive performances and induces brain functional connectivity changes in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients: an exploratory study. J Neurol2015; 262: 91–100.
40.
BrenkALaunKHaaseCG.Short-term cognitive training improves mental efficiency and mood in patients with multiple sclerosis. Eur Neurol2008; 60: 304–309.
41.
CharvetLEShawMTHaiderLet al. Remotely-delivered cognitive remediation in multiple sclerosis (MS): protocol and results from a pilot study. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin2015; 1: 1–10.
42.
CampbellJLangdonDCercignaniMet al. A randomised controlled trial of efficacy of cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: a cognitive, behavioural, and MRI study. Neural Plast2016; 2016: 4292585.
43.
De GiglioLDe LucaFProsperiniLet al. A low-cost cognitive rehabilitation with a commercial video game improves sustained attention and executive functions in multiple sclerosis: a pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2015; 29: 453–461.
44.
De GiglioLTonaFDe LucaFet al. Multiple sclerosis: changes in thalamic resting-state functional connectivity induced by a home-based cognitive rehabilitation program. Radiology2016; 280: 202–211.
45.
ErnstABlancFDe SezeJet al. Using mental visual imagery to improve autobiographical memory and episodic future thinking in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients: a randomised-controlled trial study. Restor Neurol Neurosci2015; 33: 621–638.
46.
FilippiMRiccitelliGMattioliFet al. Multiple sclerosis: effects of cognitive rehabilitation on structural and functional MR imaging measures – an explorative study. Radiology2012; 262: 932–940.
47.
GichJFreixanetJGarciaRet al. A randomized, controlled, single-blind, 6-month pilot study to evaluate the efficacy of MS-Line!: a cognitive rehabilitation programme for patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler2015; 21: 1332–1343.
48.
HancockLMBruceJMBruceASet al. Processing speed and working memory training in multiple sclerosis: a double-blind randomized controlled pilot study. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol2015; 37: 113–127.
49.
JanssenABosterALeeHet al. The effects of video-game training on broad cognitive transfer in multiple sclerosis: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol2015; 37: 285–302.
50.
JonssonAKorfitzenEMHeltbergAet al. Effects of neuropsychological treatment in patients with multiple-sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand1993; 88: 394–400.
51.
LincolnNBDentAHardingJet al. Evaluation of cognitive assessment and cognitive intervention for people with multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2002; 72: 93–98.
52.
MantynenARosti-OtajarviEKoivistoKet al. Neuropsychological rehabilitation does not improve cognitive performance but reduces perceived cognitive deficits in patients with multiple sclerosis: a randomised, controlled, multi-centre trial. Mult Scler2014; 20: 99–107.
53.
MattioliFStampatoriCZanottiDet al. Efficacy and specificity of intensive cognitive rehabilitation of attention and executive functions in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci2010; 288: 101–105.
54.
MattioliFStampatoriCScarpazzaCet al. Persistence of the effects of attention and executive functions intensive rehabilitation in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord2012; 1: 168–173.
55.
MattioliFStampatoriCBellomiFet al. A RCT comparing specific intensive cognitive training to aspecific psychological intervention in RRMS: the SMICT study. Front Neuro2014; 5: 278.
56.
MattioliFBellomiFStampatoriCet al. Two years follow up of domain specific cognitive training in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: a randomized clinical trial. Front Behav Neurosci2016; 10: 28.
57.
MendozziLPugnettiLMottaAet al. Computer-assisted memory retraining of patients with multiple sclerosis. Ital J Neurol Sci1998; 19: S431–S438.
58.
ParisiLRoccaMAMattioliFet al. Changes of brain resting state functional connectivity predict the persistence of cognitive rehabilitation effects in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler2014; 20: 686–694.
59.
Perez-MartinMYGonzalez-PlatasMEguia-Del RioPet al. Efficacy of a short cognitive training program in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat2017; 13: 245–252.
60.
Rosti-OtajarviEMantynenAKoivistoKet al. Patient-related factors may affect the outcome of neuropsychological rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci2013; 334: 106–111.
61.
Rosti-OtajärviEMMäntynenAKoivistoKet al. Neuro-psychological rehabilitation has beneficial effects on perceived cognitive deficits in multiple sclerosis during nine-month follow-up. J Neurol Sci2013; 334: 154–160.
62.
Sastre-GarrigaJAlonsoJRenomMet al. A functional magnetic resonance proof of concept pilot trial of cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler2011; 17: 457–467.
63.
ShatilEMetzerAHorvitzOet al. Home-based personalized cognitive training in MS patients: a study of adherence and cognitive performance. NeuroRehabilitation2010; 26: 143–153.
64.
BrissartHLeroyMMoreleEet al. Cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. Neurocase2013; 19: 553–565.
65.
ChiaravallotiNDDeLucaJMooreNBet al. Treating learning impairments improves memory performance in multiple sclerosis: a randomized clinical trial. Mult Scler2005; 11: 58–68.
66.
ChiaravallotiNDMooreNBNikelshpurOMet al. An RCT to treat learning impairment in multiple sclerosis: the MEMREHAB trial. Neurology2013; 81: 2066–2072.
67.
ChiaravallotiNDDeLucaJ.The influence of cognitive dysfunction on benefit from learning and memory rehabilitation in MS: a sub-analysis of the MEMREHAB trial. Mult Scler2015; 21: 1575–1582.
68.
DobryakovaEWylieGRDeLucaJet al. A pilot study examining functional brain activity 6 months after memory retraining in MS: the MEMREHAB trial. Brain Imaging Behav2014; 8: 403–406.
69.
LeavittVMWylieGRGirgisPAet al. Increased functional connectivity within memory networks following memory rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. Brain Imaging Behav2014; 8: 394–402.
70.
ShevilEFinlaysonM.Pilot study of a cognitive intervention program for persons with multiple sclerosis. Health Educ Res2010; 25: 41–53.
71.
TesarNBandionKBaumhacklU.Efficacy of a neuropsychological training programme for patients with multiple sclerosis – a randomised controlled trial. Wien Klin Wochenschr2005; 117: 747–754.
72.
PusswaldGMildnerCZebenholzerKet al. A neuropsychological rehabilitation program for patients with multiple sclerosis based on the model of the ICF. NeuroRehabilitation2014; 35: 519–527.
73.
GlasziouPMeatsEHeneghanCet al. What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews?BMJ2008; 336: 1472–1474.
74.
SamaanZMbuagbawLKosaDet al. A systematic scoping review of adherence to reporting guidelines in health care literature. J Multidiscip Healthc2013; 6: 169–188.
75.
HoffmannTCEruetiCGlasziouPP. Poor description of non-pharmacological interventions: analysis of consecutive sample of randomised trials. BMJ2013; 347: f3755.
76.
CiceroneKDDahlbergCMalecJFet al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 1998 through 2002. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2005; 86: 1681–1692.
77.
WilsonBA.Neuropsychological rehabilitation. Annu Rev Clin Psychol2008; 4: 141–162.
78.
WilsonBA.Towards a comprehensive model of cognitive rehabilitation. Neuropsychol Rehabil2002; 12: 97–110.
79.
CoboECortésJRiberaJet al. Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial. BMJ2011; 343: d6783.
80.
SmithBALeeH-JLeeJHet al. Quality of reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the nursing literature: application of the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT). Nurs Outlook2008; 56: 31–37.
81.
PlintACMoherDMorrisonAet al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust2006; 185: 263–267.
82.
KaneRLWangJGarrardJ.Reporting in randomized clinical trials improved after adoption of the CONSORT statement. J Clin Epidemiol2007; 60: 241–249.
83.
SohlbergMMMateerCA.Cognitive rehabilitation: an integrative neuropsychological approach. 1st ed.New York: The Guilford Press, 2001.
84.
MoherDSchulzKFSimeraIet al. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med2010; 7: e1000217.
85.
MateerCA.Fundamentals of cognitive rehabilitation. In: HalliganPWWadeDT (eds) Effectiveness of rehabilitation for cognitive deficits. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, pp.21–29.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
