Telerehabilitation and onsite rehabilitation effectively improve quality of life, fatigue, balance, and cognition in people with multiple sclerosis: an interventional study.

BACKGROUND

Telerehabilitation (TR) offers a valuable opportunity to improve access to care and has shown results comparable to onsite rehabilitation (SR) across different conditions. The present study aimed to explore the efficacy of TR and SR in improving clinically meaningful outcomes in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Subjects enrolled in the study were assigned to one of two treatment arms: a 6-week TR intervention or a 6-week onsite rehabilitation (SR) intervention. Pre-and post-intervention evaluation included assessment of global wellbeing using the Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life-54 scale (QoL), fatigue using the Fatigue Severity Status scale (FSS), cognitive status using the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT), and balance dysfunction using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS). Group-level and single-subject improvements were considered as outcome measures, with QoL as the primary endpoint. To determine significant group changes over time for the entire pwMS cohort, a paired -test was applied to the overall QoL score, focusing on both physical and mental composites. An independent sample -test was used to assess differences in baseline and follow-up performance, as well as changes over time between the intervention groups (TR and SR). This same analysis was repeated for the other clinical domains (FSS, BBS, and SDMT). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) according to treatment group (TR vs. SR) was explored using logistic regression. Additionally, a multiple linear regression model was applied to evaluate the impact of baseline clinical-demographic features on the observed post-intervention modifications.

RESULTS

A total of 51 subjects completed the study (37 women, mean age 46.3 ± 9.8, median Expanded Disability Status Scale 3.5, min. 2, max. 6.5). The entire sample benefited from the rehabilitation treatment, with significant improvements observed at both the group and individual levels across all measured domains for both intervention groups (TR vs. SR). Quality of life improved significantly (p = 0.005), as did fatigue and balance (both p < 0.001), and cognition (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Both SR and TR approaches effectively improved the perception of fatigue, cognitive performance, balance, and quality of life in a population of MS patients with moderate disability.