Use of cognitive aids and other assistive technology by individuals with multiple sclerosis

Abstract

Purpose-To investigate the use of assistive technology (AT), unmet needs for AT, and examine correlates of use of memory aids and cognitive strategies among individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS).Method-A cross-sectional study of 1,063 community dwelling adults with MS in Washington State. A self-report survey assessed use of AT as well as depression, fatigue, mobility, and other demographic and disease related variables.Results-Some 70% of respondents reported using memory strategies and 50.7% reported using electronic memory aids. The strongest correlate of use of electronic memory aids was endorsement of difficulties thinking (OR: 2.09, p < 0.001) though younger age, higher education, and report of higher fatigue were also significant. Fatigue (OR: 1.27, p < 0.001) and depression (OR: 0.89, p < 0.001) were highly associated with use of memory strategies. Subjects who were older, unemployed, more depressed, and have more mobility disability were less likely to use memory strategies.Conculsions-Use of AT for memory is widespread and further research should be conducted on efficacy of AT. Many individuals who might be presumed to need AT for memory most (older, less educated, more disability) are least likely to report use. Healthcare providers are urged to ask about memory AT and make appropriate referrals.

Assessment of cognition using the Rao's Brief Repeatable Battery of Neuropsychological Tests on a group of Brazilian patients with multiple sclerosis

“…From the clinical point of view, the functional status of patients with MS differs according to whether they have cognitive dysfunction or not 4 . Neuropsycho-logical rehabilitation of MS patients is challenging, since several aspects of the disease (fatigue, depression, pain, among others) may influence both the assessment and the rehabilitation of cognition 5 . Brain lesions and atrophy seem to be the anatomical substrate for the clinical cognitive findings 6,7 , although intellectual enrichment seems to positively affect cognition despite the severity of brain lesions 8 .…”

Computerized cognitive testing for patients with multiple sclerosis

“…Although there is limited evidence to support the efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation, promising data show that cognitive training could facilitate memory improvement (Rosti-Otajärvi and Hämäläinen, 2011;Chiaravalloti et al, 2005). Detecting cognitive impairment not only allows clinicians to address these difficulties in the form of rehabilitation or compensatory techniques (Johnson et al, 2009), but also helps researchers to understand the etiology of cognitive dysfunction which is fundamental to the advancement of new treatments. A number of approaches have been developed for this detecting cognitive dysfunction: (1) the self-report method, for example the Multiple Sclerosis Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ) (Benedict et al, 2003), (2) screening batteries such as the Brief Repeatable Battery (BRB-N) (Rao, 1990), and (3) a more comprehensive evaluation, such as the Minimal Assessment of Cognitive Function in MS (MACFIMS) (Benedict et al, 2002).…”

External memory aids for memory problems in people with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review

“…Eight studies were conducted in community settings and one was conducted in a rehabilitation hospital. Allen et al (1995) Did not use external memory aids Allen et al (1998) Did not use external memory aids Beer and Kesselring (2009) Did not evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention Ben Ari et al (2012) Conference abstract; full article not yet published; data not available from author Brissart et al (2010) Did not use external memory aids Brissart et al (2011) Did not use external memory aids Brissart et al (2013) Did not use external memory aids das Nair et al (2012) Did not evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention Gich et al (2011) Did not use external memory aids Johnson et al (2009) Did not evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention Kardiasmenos et al (2008) Did not use external memory aids Kesselring (2004) Did not evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention Mantynen et al (2014) Did not use external memory aids Ramio et al (2010) Did not use external memory aids Rosti-Otajarvi and Hamalainen…”

“…These excluded studies are summarised in Table 2. Five studies were excluded as they did not evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention (Beer & Kesselring, 2009;Johnson, Bamer, Yorkston, & Amtmann, 2009;Kesselring, 2004;Rosti-Otajarvi & Hama-lainen, 2011), 11 studies did not instruct participants on the use of external memory aids (Allen, Goldstein, Heyman, & Rondinelli, 1998;Allen, Longmore, & Goldstein, 1995;Brissart, Leroy, & Debouverie, 2010;Brissart, Leroy, Morele, Baumann, & Debouv-erie, 2011;Brissart et al, 2013;Gich et al, 2011;Kardiasmenos, Clawson, Wilken, & Wallin, 2008;Mantynen et al, 2014;Ramio et al, 2010;Solari et al, 2004;Topcular et al, 2010), and one study had been presented as a work in progress at a conference and was not yet published and the data were not available from the author (Ben Ari, Hertzman, Mosberg-Galili, & Hellmann, 2012).…”