Table_3_Driving ability and predictors for driving performance in Multiple Sclerosis: A systematic review.XLSX

ObjectiveTo provide an overview of the evidence on driving ability in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), specifically to (i) study the impact of MS impairment on driving ability and (ii) evaluate predictors for driving performance in MS.MethodsTo identify relevant studies, different electronic databases were screened in accordance with PRISMA guidelines; this includes reference lists of review articles, primary studies, and trial registers for protocols. Furthermore, experts in the field were contacted. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to identify relevant articles targeting driving in people with MS that investigated driving-related issues with a formal driving assessment (defined as either an on-road driving assessment; or naturalistic driving in a car equipped with video cameras to record the driving; or a driving simulator with a steering wheel, a brake pedal, and an accelerator).ResultsTwenty-four publications, with 15 unique samples (n = 806 PwMS), were identified. To assess driving ability, on-road tests (14 papers) and driving simulators (10 papers) were used. All studies showed moderate to high study quality in the CASP assessment. About 6 to 38% of PwMS failed the on-road tests, showing difficulties in different areas of driving. Similarly, PwMS showed several problems in driving simulations. Cognitive and visual impairment appeared to most impact driving ability, but the evidence was insufficient and inconsistent.ConclusionThere is an urgent need for more research and standardized guidelines for clinicians as one in five PwMS might not be able to drive safely. On-road tests may be the gold standard in assessing driving ability, but on-road protocols are heterogeneous and not infallible. Driving simulators assess driving ability in a standardized way, but without standardized routes and driving outcomes, comparability between studies is difficult. Different aspects, such as cognitive impairment or vision problems, impact driving ability negatively and should be taken into consideration when making decisions about recommending driving cessation.Systematic review registrationIdentifier [10.17605/OSF.IO/WTG9J].</p

Table_2_Driving ability and predictors for driving performance in Multiple Sclerosis: A systematic review.DOCX

ObjectiveTo provide an overview of the evidence on driving ability in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), specifically to (i) study the impact of MS impairment on driving ability and (ii) evaluate predictors for driving performance in MS.MethodsTo identify relevant studies, different electronic databases were screened in accordance with PRISMA guidelines; this includes reference lists of review articles, primary studies, and trial registers for protocols. Furthermore, experts in the field were contacted. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to identify relevant articles targeting driving in people with MS that investigated driving-related issues with a formal driving assessment (defined as either an on-road driving assessment; or naturalistic driving in a car equipped with video cameras to record the driving; or a driving simulator with a steering wheel, a brake pedal, and an accelerator).ResultsTwenty-four publications, with 15 unique samples (n = 806 PwMS), were identified. To assess driving ability, on-road tests (14 papers) and driving simulators (10 papers) were used. All studies showed moderate to high study quality in the CASP assessment. About 6 to 38% of PwMS failed the on-road tests, showing difficulties in different areas of driving. Similarly, PwMS showed several problems in driving simulations. Cognitive and visual impairment appeared to most impact driving ability, but the evidence was insufficient and inconsistent.ConclusionThere is an urgent need for more research and standardized guidelines for clinicians as one in five PwMS might not be able to drive safely. On-road tests may be the gold standard in assessing driving ability, but on-road protocols are heterogeneous and not infallible. Driving simulators assess driving ability in a standardized way, but without standardized routes and driving outcomes, comparability between studies is difficult. Different aspects, such as cognitive impairment or vision problems, impact driving ability negatively and should be taken into consideration when making decisions about recommending driving cessation.Systematic review registrationIdentifier [10.17605/OSF.IO/WTG9J].</p

Table_1_Driving ability and predictors for driving performance in Multiple Sclerosis: A systematic review.DOCX

ObjectiveTo provide an overview of the evidence on driving ability in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), specifically to (i) study the impact of MS impairment on driving ability and (ii) evaluate predictors for driving performance in MS.MethodsTo identify relevant studies, different electronic databases were screened in accordance with PRISMA guidelines; this includes reference lists of review articles, primary studies, and trial registers for protocols. Furthermore, experts in the field were contacted. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to identify relevant articles targeting driving in people with MS that investigated driving-related issues with a formal driving assessment (defined as either an on-road driving assessment; or naturalistic driving in a car equipped with video cameras to record the driving; or a driving simulator with a steering wheel, a brake pedal, and an accelerator).ResultsTwenty-four publications, with 15 unique samples (n = 806 PwMS), were identified. To assess driving ability, on-road tests (14 papers) and driving simulators (10 papers) were used. All studies showed moderate to high study quality in the CASP assessment. About 6 to 38% of PwMS failed the on-road tests, showing difficulties in different areas of driving. Similarly, PwMS showed several problems in driving simulations. Cognitive and visual impairment appeared to most impact driving ability, but the evidence was insufficient and inconsistent.ConclusionThere is an urgent need for more research and standardized guidelines for clinicians as one in five PwMS might not be able to drive safely. On-road tests may be the gold standard in assessing driving ability, but on-road protocols are heterogeneous and not infallible. Driving simulators assess driving ability in a standardized way, but without standardized routes and driving outcomes, comparability between studies is difficult. Different aspects, such as cognitive impairment or vision problems, impact driving ability negatively and should be taken into consideration when making decisions about recommending driving cessation.Systematic review registrationIdentifier [10.17605/OSF.IO/WTG9J].</p

Patient education for people with multiple sclerosis-associated fatigue: A systematic review

<div><p>Background</p><p>Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory and neurodegenerative disease often causing decreased quality of life, social withdrawal and unemployment. Studies examining the effect of pharmacological interventions demonstrated only minor effects, whereas non-pharmacological interventions as e.g. patient education programs have shown promising results.</p><p>Objective</p><p>We aim to systematically review the literature to determine the effect of patient education programs on fatigue in MS.</p><p>Methods</p><p>We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated patient education programs for MS-related fatigue. Interventions evaluating physical exercise and/or pharmacological treatments were not included. Meta-analyses were performed using the generic inverse variance method.</p><p>Results</p><p>The search identified 856 citations. After full-text screening we identified ten trials that met the inclusion criteria. Data of 1021 participants were analyzed. Meta-analyses showed significant positive effects on fatigue severity (weighted mean difference -0.43; 95% CI -0.74 to -0.11) and fatigue impact (-0.48; -0.82 to -0.15), but not for depression (-0.35 (95% CI -0.75 to 0.05; p = 0.08). Essentially, we categorized patient education programs into two types: firstly, interventions with a focus on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and secondly, interventions that teach patients ways of managing daily fatigue. CBT-based approaches seem to generate better results in reducing patient-reported fatigue severity. Analysing CBT studies only, the pooled weighted mean difference for fatigue severity was -0.60 (95% CI; -1.08 to -0.11) compared to non-CBT approaches (-0.20; 95% CI; -0.60 to -0.19). Furthermore, interventions employing an individual approach seem to reduce fatigue more effectively than group-based approaches (pooled weighted mean difference for fatigue severity in face-to-face studies was -0.80 (95% CI; -1.13 to -0.47) compared to group-based studies with -0,17 (95% CI; -0,39 to 0,05). Longest follow-up data were available for 12 months post-intervention.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Overall, included studies demonstrated that educational programs and especially CBT-based approaches have a positive effect on reducing fatigue. Since fatigue is thought to be a multidimensional symptom, it should be treated with a multidimensional approach targeting patients’ behavior as well as their emotional and mental attitude towards fatigue. However, the clinical relevance of the treatment effects i.e. the relevance for patients’ daily functioning remains unclear and long-term effects, i.e. sustainability of effects beyond 6 months, warrants further work. This review has been registered in the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews data base (Registration number: CRD42014014224).</p></div

Fatigue severity (subgroups: individual vs. group setting).

<p>Fatigue severity (subgroups: individual vs. group setting).</p

Table_1_Factors affecting driving performance in patients with Multiple Sclerosis – still an open question.DOCX

Background and objectivesResearch on driving ability in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) suggests that they might be at risk for unsafe driving due to MS-related motor, visual, and cognitive impairment. Our first aim was to investigate differences in driving ability and performance between people with MS (PwMS) and those without any neurologic or psychiatric disease (“controls”). Secondly, we determined disease-related factors influencing driving ability in PwMS.MethodsWe prospectively compared standardized performance in a driving simulator between 97 persons with early MS [mean (SD) = 6.4 (7.3) years since diagnosis, mean (SD) Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) = 2.5 (1.4)] and 94 group-matched controls. Participants completed an extensive examination comprising questionnaires and assessments regarding driving, cognitive and psychological factors, as well as demographic and disease-related measures. Between-group comparisons of driving-relevant neuropsychological tests and driving performance were done. Correlations were performed to define demographic and disease-related factors on driving performance in MS.ResultsIn a driving simulator setting, PwMS had more driving accidents [T(188) = 2.762, p = 0.006], reacted slower to hazardous events [T(188) = 2.561, p = 0.011], made more driving errors [T(188) = 2.883, p = 0.004] and had a worse Driving Safety Score (DSS) [T(188) = 3.058, p = 0.003] than controls. The only disease-related measure to be associated with most driving outcomes was the Wechsler Block-Tapping test (WMS-R) backward: number of accidents (r = 0.28, p = 0.01), number of driving errors (r = 0.23, p = 0.05) and DSS (r = −0.23, p = 0.05).ConclusionDriving performance in a simulator seems to be reduced in PwMS at an early stage of disease compared to controls, as a result of increased erroneous driving, reduced reaction time and higher accident rate. MS-related impairment in mobility, vision, cognition, and in psychological and demographic aspects showed no or only minimal association to driving ability, but impairment in different areas of cognition such as spatial short-term memory, working memory and selective attention correlated with the number of accidents, and might indicate a higher risk for driving errors and worse performance. These results show that driving ability is a complex skill with involvement of many different domains, which need further research.</p

Fatigue impact.

<p>Fatigue impact.</p

Depression (subgroups: individual vs. group setting).

<p>Depression (subgroups: individual vs. group setting).</p

Overview of types of interventions, sample sizes, dates, countries and methods of delivery.

<p>Overview of types of interventions, sample sizes, dates, countries and methods of delivery.</p

Risk of bias in individual studies.

<p>(+) low risk of bias; (?) unclear risk of bias; (-) high risk of bias.</p