effect of hydrotherapy in the rehabilitative treatment of multiple sclerosis (ms)
DESCRIPTION
Effect of hydrotherapy in the rehabilitative treatment of Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Volanti P, Scialabba G, De Cicco D. Neurorehabilitation Unit Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri, IRCCS P.O. “SS. Salvatore” – Mistretta (ME). May 25, 2010. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Effect of hydrotherapy in the Effect of hydrotherapy in the rehabilitative treatment of rehabilitative treatment of
Multiple Sclerosis (MS)Multiple Sclerosis (MS)Volanti P, Scialabba G, De Cicco D.Volanti P, Scialabba G, De Cicco D.
Neurorehabilitation UnitNeurorehabilitation Unit Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri, IRCCSFondazione Salvatore Maugeri, IRCCSP.O. “SS. Salvatore” – Mistretta (ME) P.O. “SS. Salvatore” – Mistretta (ME)
May 25, 2010
Background
Despite major advances in MS care and disease modifying therapies, no longer term benefit on disability has yet been demonstrated
The supportive and symptomatic management provided by multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes remain the mainstay of treatment
Aim of the study
To evaluate and compare the efficacy of conventional physiotherapy and hydrotherapy on impairment, disability, and quality of life of MS patients
Materials and Methods-1
Sixty patients affected by secondary progressive MS with mild to moderate disability (Expanded Disability Status Scale–EDSS scores≤6.5), referred to our Neurorehabilitation Unit, were randomly assigned to two groups, and matched for age, gender, EDSS and Functional Indipendence Mesaure (FIM) scores
Materials and Methods-2
The Control Group (n=28) received conventional physiotherapy twice a day, five times per week, for 2 consecutive months
The Hydrotherapy Group (n=32) also received conventional physiotherapy, as well as 45 min of water exercises (at 32 C) 3 times per week, for 2 consecutive months
Materials and Methods-3
Primary outcomes
Impairment and disability (EDSS and FIM scores)
Quality of life (McGill Qol-SIS)
Secondary outcomes
Spasticity (Ashwort scale) Pain (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS) Fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale,
FSS) 10-mt walking time (sec) Muscle strength (manual muscular
test, MMT) Respiratory function (spirometric
parameters)
At baseline, and at the end of the rehabilitative treatment, were evaluated:
Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of groups at baseline
Control Group (n=28) Hydrotherapy Group (n=32) p
Age (years) 41,5 ± 8,7 45 ± 6,6 ns
Sex (M/F) 15/13 16/16 ns
EDSS (0-10) 6,3 ± 0,2 6,2 ± 0,2 ns
FIMTotal score (18-128)Motor score
83,4 ± 12,555,4 ± 13,9
85,7 ± 9,456,6 ± 9,8
ns
Ashwort score (ASH, 0-4) 1,7 ± 1,1 1,8 ± 1,2 ns
Pain (VAS, 0-10) 4.8 ± 1 5 ± 0,9 ns
Fatigue (FSS,1-7) 5,1 ± 0,6 5,2 ± 0,7 ns
10-mt walking time (sec) 17,3 ± 5,1 19,2 ± 7,9 ns
Muscle Strenght (MMT)AASS (0-70)AAII (0-70)
66,7 ± 5,3 56,5 ± 11,5
66,3 ± 4,8 58,7 ± 10,1
ns
FVC (%) 97 ± 6,9 101 ± 13,2 ns
Quality of life (McGill QoL-SIS) 5,7 ± 1,1 5,4 ± 1,4 ns
Results-1 FIM scores
1836547290
108126
Before After
Control Group
HydrotherapyGroup
FIM scores before
treatment
FIM scores after
treatmentp
Control Group 83,4 ± 12,5 93,6 ± 15,4 <0,001
Hydrotherapy Group 85,7 ± 9,4 99,8 ± 10,8 <0,001
p ns <0,05
At the end of the 2 months of rehabilitative treatment, the Hydrotherapy Group improved significantly in disability, as assessed by the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scores, compared to the Control Group
FIM scores
p=nsp<0,05
Results-2 EDSS scores
0
2
4
6
8
10
Before After
ControlGroup
024
6
810
Before After
HydrotherapyGroup
At the end of the two months of treatment, no significantly changes in EDSS scores were reported in the two groups
p=ns p=ns
EDSS EDSS
Results-3 Quality of life (McGill Qol-SIS)
0123456789
10
Before After
ControlGroupHydrotherapyGroup
MQoL-SIS before
treatment
MQol-SISafter
treatmentp
Control Group 5,7 ± 1,1 6,1 ± 1,4 ns
Hydrotherapy Group 5,4 ± 1,4 6,8 ± 1,5 p<0.05
At the end of the two months of treatment, only the Hydrotherapy Group improved significantly in quality of life
MQOL-SIS
Results-4 Secondary outcomes
0
1
2
3
4
Before After
Control Group
HydrotherapyGroup
02468
10
Before After
Control Group
HydrotherapyGroup
At the end of the two months of treatment, the Hydrotherapy Group also showed a larger improvement on spasticity (Ashwort score) and pain (VAS), compared to the Control Group.
No statistical differences were reported in other secondary outcomes (fatigue, muscle strength, 10-mt walking time, respiratory function), for both control and hydrotherapy group
Ashwort score before and after treatment
VAS scores for pain before and after treatment
p=nsp=ns
p<0.05p<0.05
Conclusions
Adding hydrotherapy to the conventional Adding hydrotherapy to the conventional physiotherapy program improve function and physiotherapy program improve function and quality of life, and reduce spasticity and pain, quality of life, and reduce spasticity and pain, in patients affected by secondary progressive in patients affected by secondary progressive multiple sclerosis with mild to moderate multiple sclerosis with mild to moderate disabilitydisability