Motor Cognitive Dual-Task Testing to Predict Future Falls in Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review.

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Libak Abou, Joseph Peters, Nora E Fritz, Jacob J Sosnoff, Anna L Kratz
{"title":"Motor Cognitive Dual-Task Testing to Predict Future Falls in Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Libak Abou,&nbsp;Joseph Peters,&nbsp;Nora E Fritz,&nbsp;Jacob J Sosnoff,&nbsp;Anna L Kratz","doi":"10.1177/15459683221131791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mobility and cognitive impairments are often associated with increased fall risk among people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). However, evidence on the concurrent assessment of gait or balance and cognitive tasks (dual-task) to predict falls appears to be inconsistent.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To summarize the ability of gait or balance dual-task testing to predict future falls among PwMS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINHAL, SPORTDiscuss, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to May 2022. Two independent reviewers identified studies that performed a dual-task testing among adults with multiple sclerosis and monitored falls prospectively for at least 3 months. Both reviewers also evaluated the quality assessment of the included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies with 484 participants were included in the review. Most studies (75%) indicated that dual-task testing and dual-task cost did not discriminate prospective fallers (⩾1 fall) and non-fallers (0 fall) and were not found as predictors of future falls. However, dual-task cost of walking velocity (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.98-4.45, <i>P</i> = .05) and dual-task of correct response rate of serial 7 subtraction (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.04-3.74, <i>P</i> = .02) were significantly associated with increased risk of recurrent falls (≥2 falls). Pattern of cognitive-motor interference was also associated with an increased risk of falling. All studies presented with strong quality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The scarce evidence indicates that dual-task testing is not able to predict future falls among PwMS. Further research with more complex motor and cognitive tasks and longer-term fall monitoring is required before dual-task testing can be recommended as a predictor of future falls in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":56104,"journal":{"name":"Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair","volume":"36 12","pages":"757-769"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683221131791","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Mobility and cognitive impairments are often associated with increased fall risk among people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). However, evidence on the concurrent assessment of gait or balance and cognitive tasks (dual-task) to predict falls appears to be inconsistent.

Objective: To summarize the ability of gait or balance dual-task testing to predict future falls among PwMS.

Methods: Seven databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINHAL, SPORTDiscuss, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to May 2022. Two independent reviewers identified studies that performed a dual-task testing among adults with multiple sclerosis and monitored falls prospectively for at least 3 months. Both reviewers also evaluated the quality assessment of the included studies.

Results: Eight studies with 484 participants were included in the review. Most studies (75%) indicated that dual-task testing and dual-task cost did not discriminate prospective fallers (⩾1 fall) and non-fallers (0 fall) and were not found as predictors of future falls. However, dual-task cost of walking velocity (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.98-4.45, P = .05) and dual-task of correct response rate of serial 7 subtraction (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.04-3.74, P = .02) were significantly associated with increased risk of recurrent falls (≥2 falls). Pattern of cognitive-motor interference was also associated with an increased risk of falling. All studies presented with strong quality.

Conclusion: The scarce evidence indicates that dual-task testing is not able to predict future falls among PwMS. Further research with more complex motor and cognitive tasks and longer-term fall monitoring is required before dual-task testing can be recommended as a predictor of future falls in this population.

运动认知双任务测试预测多发性硬化症患者未来跌倒:一项系统综述。
背景:在多发性硬化症(PwMS)患者中,活动能力和认知障碍通常与跌倒风险增加有关。然而,同时评估步态或平衡和认知任务(双任务)来预测跌倒的证据似乎不一致。目的:总结步态或平衡双任务测试预测PwMS患者未来跌倒的能力。方法:检索PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Scopus、CINHAL、SPORTDiscuss、PsycINFO等7个数据库,检索时间为建库至2022年5月。两名独立审稿人确定了在多发性硬化症成人患者中进行双任务测试的研究,并对至少3个月的前瞻性跌倒进行了监测。两位审稿人还对纳入研究的质量评价进行了评价。结果:8项研究共纳入484名受试者。大多数研究(75%)表明,双任务测试和双任务成本没有区分预期跌倒者(大于或等于1次跌倒)和非跌倒者(大于或等于0次跌倒),并且没有发现它们是未来跌倒的预测因子。然而,行走速度的双任务成本(OR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.98-4.45, P = 0.05)和系列7减法的正确反应率的双任务成本(OR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.04-3.74, P = 0.02)与复发跌倒(≥2次跌倒)的风险增加显著相关。认知运动干扰的模式也与摔倒的风险增加有关。所有研究均呈现高质量。结论:缺乏证据表明双任务测试不能预测PwMS患者未来的跌倒。在双任务测试被推荐作为该人群未来跌倒的预测指标之前,需要对更复杂的运动和认知任务以及长期跌倒监测进行进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurorehabilitation & Neural Repair (NNR) offers innovative and reliable reports relevant to functional recovery from neural injury and long term neurologic care. The journal''s unique focus is evidence-based basic and clinical practice and research. NNR deals with the management and fundamental mechanisms of functional recovery from conditions such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer''s disease, brain and spinal cord injuries, and peripheral nerve injuries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信