Rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a major cause of chronic, neurological disability, with a significant long-term disability burden, often requiring comprehensive rehabilitation. OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate evidence from published Cochrane Reviews of clinical trials to summarise the evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of rehabilitation interventions for people with MS (pwMS), to improve patient outcomes, and to highlight current gaps in knowledge. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews up to December 2017, to identify Cochrane Reviews that assessed the effectiveness of organised rehabilitation interventions for pwMS. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included reviews, using the Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) tool, and the quality of the evidence for reported outcomes, using the GRADE framework. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, we included 15 reviews published in the Cochrane Library, comprising 164 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and four controlled clinical trials, with a total of 10,396 participants. The included reviews evaluated a wide range of rehabilitation interventions, including: physical activity and exercise therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), whole-body vibration, occupational therapy, cognitive and psychological interventions, nutritional and dietary supplements, vocational rehabilitation, information provision, telerehabilitation, and interventions for the management of spasticity. We assessed all reviews to be of high to moderate methodological quality, based on R-AMSTAR criteria.Moderate-quality evidence suggested that physical therapeutic modalities (exercise and physical activities) improved functional outcomes (mobility, muscular strength), reduced impairment (fatigue), and improved participation (quality of life). Moderate-quality evidence suggested that inpatient or outpatient multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes led to longer-term gains at the levels of activity and participation, and interventions that provided information improved patient knowledge. Low-qualitty evidence suggested that neuropsychological interventions, symptom-management programmes (spasticity), whole body vibration, and telerehabilitation improved some patient outcomes. Evidence for other rehabilitation modalities was inconclusive, due to lack of robust studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that regular specialist evaluation and follow-up to assess the needs of patients with all types of MS for appropriate rehabilitation interventions may be of benefit, although the certainty of evidence varies across the different types of interventions evaluated by the reviews. Structured, multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes and physical therapy (exercise or physical activities) can improve functional outcomes (mobility, muscle strength, aerobic capacity), and quality of life. Overall, the evidence for many rehabilitation interventions should be interpreted cautiously, as the majority of included reviews did not include data from current studies. More studies, with appropriate design, which report the type and intensity of modalities and their cost-effectiveness are needed to address the current gaps in knowledge.

Applicability of traumatic brain injury rehabilitation interventions in natural disaster settings.

Objective: To evaluate published traumatic brain injury (TBI) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and assess rehabilitation intervention recommendations for applicability in disaster settings. Methods: Recommendations for rehabilitation interventions were synthesized from currently published TBI CPGs, developed by the Department of Labor and Employment (DLE); Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN); Department of Veterans Affairs/Department of Defence (DVA/DOD); and American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA). Three authors independently extracted, compared, and categorized evidence-based rehabilitation intervention recommendations from these CPGs for applicability in disaster settings. Results: The key recommendations from a rehabilitation perspective for TBI survivors in disaster settings included patient/carer education, general physical therapy, practice in daily living activities and safe equipment use, direct cognitive/behavioral feedback, basic compensatory memory/visual strategies, basic swallowing/communication, and psychological input. More advanced interventions are generally not applicable following disasters due to limited access to services, trained staff/resources, equipment, funding, and operational issues. Conclusions: Many recommendations for TBI care are challenging to implement in disaster settings due to complexities related to the environment, resources, service provision, workforce, and other reasons. Further research is needed to identify and address barriers for implementation.

Clinical practice guidelines for rehabilitation in traumatic brain injury: a critical appraisal.

This review aim to provide an overview of recommendations and quality of existing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) from the rehabilitation perspective. Comprehensive literature search, including health databases, CPG clearinghouse/developer websites, and grey literature using Internet search engines up to September 2017. All TBI CPGs published in the last decade were selected if their scope included management of TBI, systematic methods for evidence search, clear defined recommendations, and supporting evidence for rehabilitation interventions. Three authors independently critically appraised the quality of included CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument. Four of 13 potential CPGs met the inclusion criteria. Despite variation in scope, target population, size, and guideline development processes, all four CPGs assessed were good quality (AGREE score of 5-7/7). Key rehabilitation recommendations included education, physical rehabilitation, integrated computer-based management, repetitive task-specific practice in daily living activities, safe equipment usage, cognitive/behavioral feedback, compensatory memory/visual strategies, swallowing/communication, and psychological input for TBI survivors. In conclusion, although rehabilitation is an integral component in TBI management, many published CPGs do not include rehabilitation. These CPGs, however, recommend comprehensive, flexible coordinated multidisciplinary care and appropriate follow-up, education, and support for patients with TBI (and carers).

Non-pharmacological interventions for chronic pain in multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is common and significantly impacts on the lives of persons with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). Various types of non-pharmacological interventions are widely used, both in hospital and ambulatory/mobility settings to improve pain control in pwMS, but the effectiveness and safety of many non-pharmacological modalities is still unknown. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of non-pharmacological therapies for the management of chronic pain in pwMS. Specific questions to be addressed by this review include the following.Are non-pharmacological interventions (unidisciplinary and/or multidisciplinary rehabilitation) effective in reducing chronic pain in pwMS?What type of non-pharmacological interventions (unidisciplinary and/or multidisciplinary rehabilitation) are effective (least and most effective) and in what setting, in reducing chronic pain in pwMS? SEARCH METHODS: A literature search was performed using the specialised register of the Cochrane MS and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Review Group, using the Cochrane MS Group Trials Register which contains CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACUS, Clinical trials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 10 December 2017. Handsearching of relevant journals and screening of reference lists of relevant studies was carried out. SELECTION CRITERIA: All published randomised controlled trials (RCTs)and cross-over studies that compared non-pharmacological therapies with a control intervention for managing chronic pain in pwMS were included. Clinical controlled trials (CCTs) were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All three review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of the studies using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool for best-evidence synthesis. Pooling data for meta-analysis was not possible due to methodological, clinical and statistically heterogeneity of the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 10 RCTs with 565 participants which investigated different non-pharmacological interventions for the management of chronic pain in MS fulfilled the review inclusion criteria. The non-pharmacological interventions evaluated included: transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), psychotherapy (telephone self-management, hypnosis and electroencephalogram (EEG) biofeedback), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), transcranial direct stimulation (tDCS), hydrotherapy (Ai Chi) and reflexology.There is very low-level evidence for the use of non-pharmacological interventions for chronic pain such as TENS, Ai Chi, tDCS, tRNS, telephone-delivered self-management program, EEG biofeedback and reflexology in pain intensity in pwMS. Although there were improved changes in pain scores and secondary outcomes (such as fatigue, psychological symptoms, spasm in some interventions), these were limited by methodological biases within the studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite the use of a wide range of non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of chronic pain in pwMS, the evidence for these interventions is still limited or insufficient, or both. More studies with robust methodology and greater numbers of participants are needed to justify the effect of these interventions for the management of chronic pain in pwMS.

Rehabilitation in Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate existing evidence from published systematic reviews of clinical trials for the effectiveness of rehabilitation for improving function and participation in persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted using medical and health science electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, Cochrane Library) up to January 31, 2016. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently applied inclusion criteria to select potential systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness of organized rehabilitation for persons with MS. Data were summarized for type of interventions, type of study designs included, outcome domains, method of data synthesis, and findings. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted by 2 reviewers independently for methodological quality using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews. Quality of evidence was critically appraised with the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty-nine systematic reviews (one with 2 reports) evaluated best evidence to date. There is "strong" evidence for physical therapy for improved activity and participation, and for exercise-based educational programs for the reduction of patient-reported fatigue. There is "moderate" evidence for multidisciplinary rehabilitation for longer-term gains at the levels of activity (disability) and participation, for cognitive-behavior therapy for the treatment of depression, and for information-provision interventions for improved patient knowledge. There is "limited" evidence for better patient outcomes using psychological and symptom management programs (fatigue, spasticity). For other rehabilitation interventions, the evidence is inconclusive because of limited methodologically robust studies. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the range of rehabilitative treatments available for MS, there is a lack of high-quality evidence for many modalities. Further research is needed for effective rehabilitation approaches with appropriate study design, outcome measurement, type and intensity of modalities, and cost-effectiveness of these interventions.

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation after primary brain tumour treatment.

BACKGROUND: Brain tumours can cause significant disability, which may be amenable to multidisciplinary rehabilitation. However, the evidence base for this is unclear. This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [2013, Issue 1, Art. No. CD009509] on 'Multidisciplinary rehabilitation after primary brain tumour treatment'. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in people after primary brain tumour treatment, especially the types of approaches that are effective (settings, intensity). SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library up to Issue 12 of 12, 2014), MEDLINE (1950 to January week 2, 2015), EMBASE (1980 to January week 2, 2015), PEDro (1985 to January week 2 2015), and LILACS (1982 to January week 2, 2015). We checked the bibliographies of papers we identified and contacted the authors and known experts in the field to seek published and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Controlled clinical trials (randomised and non-randomised clinical trials) that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation in primary brain tumour with either routinely available local services or lower levels of intervention, or studies that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation in different settings or at different levels of intensity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed study quality, extracted data, and performed a 'best evidence ' synthesis based on methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any studies for inclusion in the previous version of this review. For this update, the literature search identified one low-quality controlled clinical trial involving 106 participants. The findings from this study suggest 'low-level' evidence to support high-intensity ambulatory (outpatient) multidisciplinary rehabilitation in reducing short- and long-term motor disability (continence, mobility and locomotion, cognition), when compared with standard outpatient care. We found improvement in some domains of disability (continence, communication) and psychosocial gains were maintained at six months follow-up. We found no evidence for improvement in overall participation (quality of life and societal relationship). No adverse events were reported as a result of multidisciplinary rehabilitation. We found no evidence for improvement in quality of life or cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation. It was also not possible to suggest best 'dose' of therapy. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review, one new study has been identified for inclusion. The best evidence to date comes from this CCT, which provides low quality evidence that higher intensity ambulatory (outpatient) multidisciplinary rehabilitation reduces short- and long-term disability in people with brain tumour compared with standard outpatient care. Our conclusions are tentative at best, given gaps in current research in this area. Although the strength of evidence has increased with the identification of a new controlled clinical trial in this updated review, further research is needed into appropriate and robust study designs; outcome measurement; caregiver needs; evaluation of optimal settings; type, intensity, duration of therapy; and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in the brain tumour population.

Telerehabilitation for persons with multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Telerehabilitation, an emerging method, extends rehabilitative care beyond the hospital, and facilitates multifaceted, often psychotherapeutic approaches to modern management of patients using telecommunication technology at home or in the community. Although a wide range of telerehabilitation interventions are trialed in persons with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), evidence for their effectiveness is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of telerehabilitation intervention in pwMS for improved patient outcomes. Specifically, this review addresses the following questions: does telerehabilitation achieve better outcomes compared with traditional face-to-face intervention; and what types of telerehabilitation interventions are effective, in which setting and influence which specific outcomes (impairment, activity limitation and participation)? SEARCH METHODS: We performed a literature search using the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Review Group Specialised Register( 9 July, 2014.) We handsearched the relevant journals and screened the reference lists of identified studies, and contacted authors for additional data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that reported telerehabilitation intervention/s in pwMS and compared them with some form of control intervention (such as lower level or different types of intervention, minimal intervention, waiting-list controls or no treatment (or usual care); interventions given in different settings) in adults with MS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. Three review authors assessed the methodological quality of studies using the GRADEpro software (GRADEpro 2008) for best-evidence synthesis. A meta-analysis was not possible due to marked methodological, clinical and statistical heterogeneity between included trials and between measurement tools used. Hence, we performed a best-evidence synthesis using a qualitative analysis. MAIN RESULTS: Nine RCTs, one with two reports, (N = 531 participants, 469 included in analyses) investigated a variety of telerehabilitation interventions in adults with MS. The mean age of participants varied from 41 to 52 years (mean 46.5 years) and mean years since diagnosis from 7.7 to 19.0 years (mean 12.3 years). The majority of the participants were women (proportion ranging from 56% to 87%, mean 74%) and with a relapsing-remitting course of MS. These interventions were complex, with more than one rehabilitation component and included physical activity, educational, behavioural and symptom management programmes.All studies scored 'low' on the methodological quality assessment. Overall, the review found 'low-level' evidence for telerehabilitation interventions in reducing short-term disability and symptoms such as fatigue. There was also 'low-level' evidence supporting telerehabilitation in the longer term for improved functional activities, impairments (such as fatigue, pain, insomnia); and participation measured by quality of life and psychological outcomes. There were limited data on process evaluation (participants'/therapists' satisfaction) and no data available for cost effectiveness. There were no adverse events reported as a result of telerehabilitation interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently limited evidence on the efficacy of telerehabilitation in improving functional activities, fatigue and quality of life in adults with MS. A range of telerehabilitation interventions might be an alternative method of delivering services in MS populations. There is insufficient evidence to support on what types of telerehabilitation interventions are effective, and in which setting. More robust trials are needed to build evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of these interventions.

Medical Rehabilitation in Natural Disasters: A Review.

OBJECTIVE: To present an evidence-based overview of the effectiveness of medical rehabilitation intervention in natural disaster survivors and outcomes that are affected. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted using medical and health science electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO) up to September 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers selected studies reporting outcomes for natural disaster survivors after medical rehabilitation that addressed functional restoration and participation. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the methodologic quality of the studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program's appraisal tools. DATA SYNTHESIS: A meta-analysis was not possible because of heterogeneity among included trials; therefore, a narrative analysis was performed for best evidence synthesis. Ten studies (2 randomized controlled trials, 8 observational studies) investigated a variety of medical rehabilitation interventions for natural disaster survivors to evaluate best evidence to date. The interventions ranged from comprehensive multidisciplinary rehabilitation to community educational programs. Studies scored low on quality assessment because of methodologic limitations. The findings suggest some evidence for the effectiveness of inpatient rehabilitation in reducing disability and improving participation and quality of life and for community-based rehabilitation for participation. There were no data available for associated costs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the need to incorporate medical rehabilitation into response planning and disaster management for future natural catastrophes. Access to rehabilitation and investment in sustainable infrastructure and education are crucial. More methodologically robust studies are needed to build evidence for rehabilitation programs, cost-effectiveness, and outcome measurement in such settings.

Rehabilitation in adults with burn injury: an overview of systematic reviews.

PURPOSE: To systematically evaluate evidence from published systematic reviews for the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in adults with burn injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature review conducted using medical and health science electronic databases up to 31 July 2022. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological study quality using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2), and the certainty of evidence for reported outcomes using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. RESULTS: Twenty-one systematic reviews evaluated five categories of interventions: physical, psychological, technology-aided modalities, educational and occupational programs, complementary and alternative medicine. Outcomes included fitness level, hand function, oedema, pain, pruritus, psychological state, quality of life, range of motion, return to work, strength, scar characteristics, level of impairment and burn knowledge. The methodological quality was rated as "critically low" for all reviews. Quality of evidence for the effectiveness of evaluated interventions ranged from "moderate to very low." CONCLUSIONS: Beneficial effects of inhaled aromatherapy and extracorporeal shockwave therapy on pain reduction; inhaled or massage aromatherapy, music therapy on anxiety were reported. Safety of interventions was not evaluated, due to the lack of adverse event reporting in primary studies and the included reviews.

Burn injury is a leading cause of severe morbidity, and long-term disability, with significant health and economic burden.There is emerging evidence to support the use of complementary and alternative medicine interventions (such as aromatherapy and music therapy) for alleviating anxiety.Extracorporeal shockwave therapy with comprehensive rehabilitation therapy has positive effects on pain reduction.These interventions may be considered as adjunctive tools to enhance burn rehabilitation care and improve patient outcomes. However, further robust studies are required to strengthen the evidence, explore adverse effects and associated cost efficiency.

Factors associated with long-term functional outcomes, psychological sequelae and quality of life in persons after primary brain tumour.

To examine factors impacting long-term functional outcomes and psychological sequelae in persons with primary brain tumours (BT) in an Australian community cohort. Participants (n = 106) following definitive treatment for BT in the community were reviewed in rehabilitation clinics to assess impact on participants' current activity and restriction in participation, using validated questionnaires: Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Perceived Impact Problem Profile (PIPP), Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System-Short Form and Cancer Survivor Unmet Needs Measure. Mean age of the participants was 51 years (range 21-77 years), majority were female (56 %) with median time since BT diagnosis 2.1 years and a third (39 %) had high grade tumours. Majority showed good functional recovery (median motor FIM score 75). Over half reported pain (56 %), of which 42 % had headaches. Other impairments included: ataxia (44 %), seizures (43 %); paresis (37 %), cognitive dysfunction (36 %) and visual impairment (35 %). About 20 % reported high levels of depression, compared with only 13 % in an Australian normative sample. Two-third (60 %) participants reported highest impact on the PIPP subscales for psychological wellbeing (scores of >3 on 6-point scale) and participation (45 %). Factors significantly associated with poorer current level of functioning and wellbeing included: younger participants (≤40 years), recent diagnoses, aggressive tumour types and presence of pain. No significant differences in scale scores were found across various treatments (surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy) on outcomes used. Rehabilitation for BT survivors is challenging and requires long-term management of psychological sequelae impacting activity and participation. More research into participatory limitation is needed to guide treating clinicians.

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation after primary brain tumour treatment.

BACKGROUND: Brain tumours can cause significant disability, which may be amenable to multidisciplinary rehabilitation. However, the evidence base for this is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in adults after primary brain tumour treatment, especially the types of approaches that are effective (settings, intensity) and the outcomes that are affected. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (March week 2, 2012), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2012), MEDLINE (1966 to March week 2, 2012), EMBASE (1980 to March week 2, 2012), PEDro (1982 to March 2012) and LILACS (1982 to March week 2, 2012). We checked the bibliographies of papers identified and contacted the authors and known experts in the field to seek published and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Controlled clinical trials (randomised and non-randomised clinical trials) that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation in primary brain tumour with either routinely available local services or lower levels of intervention, or studies that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation in different settings or at different levels of intensity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed study quality, extracted data and performed a 'best evidence' synthesis based on methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS: No randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No RCTs or CCTs were available for synthesis of 'best evidence' for multidisciplinary rehabilitation after treatment for brain tumour patients. However, this does not suggest the ineffectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation but rather highlights the challenges in trial design and rigour, outcome measurement and complexities of care in this population. For completeness of literature, 12 observational studies (with high risk of bias) involving patients with brain tumours were included. These studies provided 'very low level' evidence suggesting that multidisciplinary rehabilitation (inpatient, home-based) may improve functional outcomes, and ambulatory programmes (outpatient and home-based) may improve vocation and quality of life. These conclusions are tentative at best, given gaps in current research in this area. Further research is needed into appropriate and robust study designs, outcome measurement, caregiver needs, evaluation of optimal settings, type, intensity, duration of therapy, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in the brain tumour population.

Non pharmacological interventions for spasticity in multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Spasticity is commonly experienced by people with multiple sclerosis (MS), and it contributes to overall disability in this population. A wide range of non pharmacological interventions are used in isolation or with pharmacological agents to treat spasticity in MS. Evidence for their effectiveness is yet to be determined. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of various non pharmacological interventions for the treatment of spasticity in adults with MS. SEARCH METHODS: A literature search was performed using the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Review Group on using the Cochrane MS Group Trials Register which among other sources, contains CENTRAL, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, PEDRO in June 2012. Manual searching in the relevant journals and screening of the reference lists of identified studies and reviews were carried out. Abstracts published in proceedings of conferences were also scrutinised. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that reported non pharmacological intervention/s for treatment of spasticity in adults with MS and compared them with some form of control intervention (such as sham/placebo interventions or lower level or different types of intervention, minimal intervention, waiting list controls or no treatment; interventions given in different settings), were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently selected the studies, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of the studies using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool for best-evidence synthesis. A meta-analysis was not possible due to methodological, clinical and statistical heterogeneity of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Nine RCTs (N = 341 participants, 301 included in analyses) investigated various types and intensities of non pharmacological interventions for treating spasticity in adults with MS. These interventions included: physical activity programmes (such as physiotherapy, structured exercise programme, sports climbing); transcranial magnetic stimulation (Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS), Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS)); electromagnetic therapy (pulsed electromagnetic therapy; magnetic pulsing device), Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS); and Whole Body Vibration (WBV). All studies scored 'low' on the methodological quality assessment implying high risk of bias. There is 'low level' evidence for physical activity programmes used in isolation or in combination with other interventions (pharmacological or non pharmacological), and for repetitive magnetic stimulation (iTBS/rTMS) with or without adjuvant exercise therapy in improving spasticity in adults with MS. No evidence of benefit exists to support the use of TENS, sports climbing and vibration therapy for treating spasticity in this population. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is 'low level' evidence for non pharmacological interventions such as physical activities given in conjunction with other interventions, and for magnetic stimulation and electromagnetic therapies for beneficial effects on spasticity outcomes in people with MS. A wide range of non pharmacological interventions are used for the treatment of spasticity in MS, but more robust trials are needed to build evidence about these interventions.

Disaster Response and Management: The Integral Role of Rehabilitation.

With the increasing frequency of disasters and the significant upsurge of survivors with severe impairments and long-term disabling conditions, there is a greater focus on the importance of rehabilitation in disaster management. During disasters, rehabilitation services confront a greater load due to the influx of victims, management of persons with pre-existing disabilities and chronic conditions, and longer-term care continuum. Despite robust consensus amongst the international disaster response and management community for the rehabilitation-inclusive disaster management process, rehabilitation is still less prioritised. Evidence supports the early involvement of rehabilitation professionals in disaster response and management for minimising mortality and disability, and improving clinical outcomes and participation in disaster survivors. In the last two decades, there have been substantial developments in disaster response/management processes including the World Health Organization Emergency Medical Team (EMT) initiative, which provides a standardized structured plan to provide effective and coordinated care during disasters. However, rehabilitation-inclusive disaster management plans are yet to be developed and/or implemented in many disaster-prone countries. Strong leadership and effective action from national and international bodies are required to strengthen national rehabilitation capacity (services and skilled workforce) and empower international and local EMTs and health services for comprehensive disaster management in future calamities. This narrative review highlights the role of rehabilitation and current developments in disaster rehabilitation; challenges and key future perspectives in this area.

Does memory rehabilitation improve health outcomes in people with multiple sclerosis? A Cochrane Review summary with commentary.

BACKGROUND: Memory disturbance is common in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). Currently, a range of memory rehabilitation approaches alone or as a component of cognitive rehabilitation is utilized clinically. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation in improving health outcomes (memory, cognitive function, functional ability, quality of life) in pwMS. METHODS: A summary of the Cochrane Review "Memory rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis" by Taylor et al from a rehabilitation perspective. RESULTS: The review included 44 studies (with 2714 participants). The memory rehabilitation approaches varied amongst the included primary studies for memory retraining techniques (computerized programs, training using internal and external memory aids, etc.). Overall, the risk of bias amongst the included trials was low. The findings suggest high-certainty evidence for a beneficial effect of memory rehabilitation in improving subjective memory at intermediate- (1-6 months) and longer-term (> 6 months); and moderate-certainty evidence at immediate post-intervention. The evidence of the effect of memory rehabilitation on other outcomes showed mixed results. CONCLUSION: The evidence suggests some beneficial effects of memory rehabilitation in improving subjective memory and quality of life in pwMS. However, further evidence is required for the evaluation of memory strategies for other outcomes.

Factors associated with long-term functional and psychosocial outcomes in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term functional, psychosocial and participation outcomes in an Australian cohort of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) survivors. METHODS: A cross-sectional sample of adult NHL survivors at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (between 2015 and 2020), participated by completing validated questionnaires. A series of analyses described their current level of function, psychosocial well-being, and participation. RESULTS: Of 129 participants (mean (M) ± standard deviation (SD) age: 62.5 ± 8.8 years), the majority (58%) had aggressive NHL and grade III-IV (72%), with time since diagnosis of 4.6 ± 1.2 years. Participants reported ongoing issues after completion of treatment: fatigue (63%), bladder dysfunction (61%), cognitive impairment (53%), and NHL-related pain (46%). Most made good functional recovery (M ± SD) (Functional Independent Measure-Motor: 79.5 ± 8.2), reported minimal change in their negative emotional states, and NHL-specific quality of life (QoL) (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma: 133.5 ± 22.1). Participants were "well" adjusted to community living (Community Integration Measure: 42.2 ± 7.4) and satisfied with their current life (Satisfaction with Life Scale: 26.3 ± 6.0). Factors significantly associated with the poorer current level of function were: age at diagnosis < 60 years, time since NHL diagnosis > 4.5 years, and aggressive NHL type. CONCLUSION: Despite good functional recovery and adjustment in the community, NHL survivors report the presence of ongoing residual impairments and cognitive issues, which requires long-term rehabilitation-inclusive management.

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for follow-up of women treated for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women worldwide. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation aims to improve outcomes for women but the evidence base for its effectiveness is yet to be established. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of organised multidisciplinary rehabilitation during follow-up in women treated for breast cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro and LILACS in December 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and controlled clinical trials (RCTs, CCTs, respectively) that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation with some form of control intervention (such as a lower level or different type of intervention, minimal intervention, waiting list controls or no treatment, interventions given in different settings). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The type of data retrieved did not allow for quantitative synthesis and therefore a narrative synthesis was provided. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated by three authors using the risk of bias tool. MAIN RESULTS: Two RCTs, including 262 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Both trials scored poorly for methodological quality. There was 'low level' evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation produced short-term gains at the levels of impairment (that is range of shoulder movement), psychosocial adjustment and quality of life after breast cancer treatment (up to 12 months). No evidence was available for the longer-term functional outcomes for caregivers or the cost effectiveness of these programmes. It was not possible to suggest the most appropriate frequency and duration of therapy or choice of one type of intervention over another. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was 'low level' evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation can improve the outcomes of people with breast cancer in terms of functional ability, psychosocial adjustment and participation in social activities. There was no evidence available on functional gain at the level of activity. This review highlights the limitations of RCTs in rehabilitation settings and the need for high-quality trial-based research in this area. Regular evaluation and assessment of breast cancer survivors for rehabilitation is recommended.

Do dietary interventions improve health outcomes in people with multiple sclerosis? A cochrane review summary with commentary.

BACKGROUND: A broad range of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches, including different dietary interventions, alone or in conjunction with conventional medicine are currently trailed in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Published clinical and experimental data suggest that certain dietary interventions may improve MS-related health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of dietary interventions to improve MS-related health outcomes. METHODS: To summarize the updated Cochrane Review "Dietary interventions for multiple sclerosis-related outcomes" conducted by Parks et al. Best available evidence was discussed from the rehabilitation perspective. RESULTS: Overall 30 RCTs (with 2335 participants) evaluated a range of dietary interventions: polyunsaturated fatty acids, antioxidant supplements, dietary programmes and other dietary supplements. All included trials had one or more methodological issues leading to an unknown or high risk of bias. The findings suggest that the evidence is uncertain about the effect of dietary interventions on MS-related health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for dietary interventions in people with MS is sparse and uncertain, and more robust studies are needed.

Overview of systematic reviews: Management of common Traumatic Brain Injury-related complications.

BACKGROUND: Many clinical interventions are trialled to manage medical complications following Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). However, published evidence for the effects of those clinical interventions is limited. This article is an overview of common complications and their management from published systematic reviews in TBI. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A health science electronic database search for published systematic reviews for management of common complications in TBI was conducted in the last decade till 31st January 2021. Methodological quality and evidence were critically appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations and Revised-Assessment of Multiple Systematic review tools. Overall, only six systematic reviews complied with search criteria, these evaluated fatigue, spasticity and post traumatic seizures (29 RCTs, 13 cohort studies, n = 5639 participants). No systematic reviews for other common TBI-related complications met criteria for this review. The included reviews varied from 'moderate to high' in methodological quality. The findings suggest beneficial treatment effect of anti-epileptic drugs (phenytoin/levetiracetam) compared with placebo in reducing early seizure incidence, but no significant benefit of phenytoin over levetiracetam, valproate, or neuroprotective agent for early or late posttraumatic seizures. There was 'limited' evidence for spasticity-related interventions, and 'insufficient' evidence of cardiorespiratory training on fatigue levels. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high prevalence and associated functional impact of TBI-related complications, there is limited evidence to guide treating clinicians for management of common TBI complications. More robust studies are needed to build evidence in this population.

Responsiveness of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability And Health (ICF) Clinical Functioning Information Tool (ClinFIT) in Routine Clinical Practice in an Australian Inpatient Rehabilitation Setting.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the responsiveness of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Clinical Functioning Information Tool (ClinFIT) in routine clinical practice in an Australian context. METHODS: A prospective observational study with consecutive recruitment of inpatients at a tertiary rehabilitation facility. The assessments were at admission (T0), discharge (T1) and 3-month postdischarge (T2), using the following questionnaires: ClinFIT, Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and European Quality of Life (EQ-5D-5L). Extension Indices (EI) were calculated for the ClinFIT set, and responsiveness measured as a change in scores over time. The association between FIM and ClinFIT scores was explored. RESULTS: Participants (n = 91, mean age 66.8±13.0 years, 52% male, 48% following stroke) reported ≥ 1 issue related to ClinFIT categories. ClinFIT total raw scores improved significantly across all health conditions compared with T0 (median (interquartile range): 196 (110, 228)) at both T1: 69 (37, 110); p < 0.001 and T2: 46.5 (20.8, 77); p < 0.001, with a medium effect size (r = 0.61 for both). There were significant changes in EI in the entire ClinFIT set from T0 to T1, and from T0 to T2 (p < 0.001 for both), with small to medium effect sizes. Analyses confirmed significant correlation in improvements between ClinFIT and FIM scores. CONCLUSION: ClinFIT is useful in evaluating patient functioning and can detect changes in functioning over time and across different health conditions.

A process evaluation of patient care needs using the Post-Stroke Checklist: A prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of the modified Post-Stroke Checklist (mPSC) to identify impairments and care needs of patients with stroke (PwS) in an inpatient rehabilitation setting. METHODS: Prospective observational design with consecutive admission of PwS (n = 44) at a tertiary rehabilitation facility. The post-stroke checklist was administered at hospital discharge (T1) and 3 months post-discharge (T2). Furthermore, validated questionnaires assessed function and participation, including the Clinical Functioning Information Tool (ClinFIT) on admission (T0), T1 and T2. RESULTS: Participants' mean age was 67.7 years (standard deviation; SD) 14.6), 58% of participants were female, and the mean length of inpatient stay was 32.7 days (SD 22.4). At T1, 80% and at T2 only 60% of participants reported ≥1 stroke-related problem (mean 5.3 (SD 3.3) and 3.6 (SD 2.8), respectively). Half of participants were referred to physiotherapy/occupational therapy, and 36% to specialist clinics following discharge. The most prevalent problems included: life after stroke (62.2%), fatigue (55.6%), activities of daily living, and mobility (51.1% each). Compared with T1, at T2 there was an observed reduction in all mPSC items, except pain and incontinence. Participants showed improved function at T1 and T2 (Extension Index, ClinFIT set), from T0 to T1 and T0 to T2 (p<0.001, with large effect sizes). CONCLUSION: The mPSC is feasible to implement in an inpatient rehabilitation setting and community. It can identify relevant stroke-related problems, and hence facilitate targeted intervention.