A blended virtual/presential rehabilitation program;a useful tool for PwMS with EDSS ≤6.5?

ABSTRACT

Background: Since the Covid-19 pandemic started, it has been necessary to adapt our clinical practice to limit physical contact. We have established a virtual/presential rehabilitation program (VPR) in patients with EDSS ≤6.5. Methods: Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of the VPR with the previous face-to-face rehabilitation program (PR). Retrospective data were obtained from all patients with an EDSS≤6.5 who were admitted between September and December of 2019 and 2020. All patients were attended 3 times per week for 4 months. In the 2019 group the sessions were PR based, whereas in the 2020 group patients received a VPR, with one face-to-face session plus 2 virtual sessions. Outcomes (obtained pre and post rehabilitation programs) compared between VPR and PR groups were 10MWT, Tinnetti Test (TT) and Berg Balance Scale (BBS). A minimally clinical significant difference was established for each test 20% for 10MWT, 3 points for BBS and 1 point for TT. Results: One hundred and forty people were included in the groups VPR (n=80) / PR (N=60). For VPR and PR groups, mean age was 51.45y (SD10.71) / 54.65y (SD11.19) and mean EDSS 4.62 (SD1.45) / 4.64 (SD1.46). All clinical outcomes demonstrated statistically significant improvements pre-post intervention in both groups. Comparing VPR vs PR scores, test didn't show differences using a U of Mann-Whitney for independent samples BBS 54.2%/44.1% (p =0.27);10MWT 36.7%/22.0% (p =0.13) and TT 40.7%/37.3% (p =0.72). Conclusions: No differences were observed in the effectiveness of VPR versus PR in any of the tests. The VPR program could be a useful tool for patients with an EDSS≤6.5, as the VPR provides a series of subjective benefits (ease of occupational and family life, reduction of fatigue caused by long journeys) while maintaining effectiveness. Further studies with improved designs are warranted to confirm these findings.