A Reeducation Program to Effort to Improve the Walking of Multiple Sclerosis Patients
NCT ID: NCT02874677
Last Updated: 2024-03-26
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
TERMINATED
NA
46 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-12-07
2022-01-14
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Some reeducation programs were proposed in hospitalization with some efficiency on functional capacities. It is now admitted that physical exercise is not noxious, and allows the implementation of effort reeducation for MS. Randomized controlled studies have shown in MS patients an improvement of physical abilities, of O2max (aerobic capacity), of quality of life and a decrease of fatigue. For MS, only a few studies estimate the effect of effort reeducation on treadmill. Unfortunately, the efficiency of these programs on walking endurance are controversial.
During the maximal cardiorespiratory effort test, the ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) corresponds to a greater increasing of CO2 compared to O2. The identification of VT1 allows the precise determination of the limit from which the body is incapable of producing the necessary energy to realize an effort using the aerobic metabolism. The VT1 is situated at a level of load with enough intensity for the subject to support the test without dyspnea. A VT1 lower than 40 % of the theoretical VO2 max is considered as a marker of maladjustment to effort due to dyspnea and excessive muscular fatigue. This indication is very informative about the quality of life of patients.
The goal of this study is to apply a personalized reeducation concerning the working load pre-hyperventilation to deconditioned subjects, easily worried by effort induced breathlessness and fatigue in order to get the optimization of the aerobic function. The hypothesis is that reeducation at this level improves the distance of walking and the quality of life of patients affected by MS.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Short Effects of a Rehabilitation Session on Gait in Patients With CNS
NCT01807247
Underlying Causes and Related Factors, and Rehabilitation Approaches
NCT04142853
Effects of Task-oriented Training on Functional Mobility and Fatigue in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis
NCT03497468
Unravelling The Optimisation And Consolidation Of Motor Skills In People With Multiple Sclerosis With Severe Gait Impairment: A Feasibility Study
NCT07058896
Changes in Physical Activity in All Day Life in People With MS Before and After Rehabilitation
NCT03769636
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Efforts oriented to the deconditioning of people affected by multiple sclerosis are already proven, but they are not only linked to the disease itself. The decrease of capacities to produce an effort is aggravated by neurovegetative and cardiovascular disorders.
The limitation, even the complete stop, of physical activity is often linked to the fear of a handicap aggravation. Causes of stop are multiple, including fatigue (general and muscular) and balance disorders, even if the handicap level is low (average EDSS = 2).
Walking disorders generated by this pathology are frequent and represent the first symptom of the disease (10 to 20 % of cases). These walking disorders quickly appear and alter significantly the quality of life.
After several years of evolution, functional effects are more and more pronounced. The walking perimeter is estimated at 500 meters without help after 7 years of evolution on average, and no more than 100 meters after 15 years of evolution. At this stage, 50 % of patients need a technical help to move.
Some reeducation programs were proposed in hospitalization with some efficiency on functional capacities. It is now admitted that physical exercise is not noxious, and allows the implementation of effort reeducation for this pathology. Randomized controlled studies have shown in multiple sclerosis patients an improvement of physical abilities, of O2max (aerobic capacity), a decrease of fatigue and an improvement of quality of life.
Actually, the cyclo-ergometer is the most common device used for the effort reeducation. Another approach is the use of a treadmill, based on the improvement of the walking reflex modeling and the enhancement of the specific walking work, thanks to a high frequency of repetitions. This device seems more adapted for the improvement of walking disorders than the cyclo-ergometer.
For this pathology, only a few studies estimated the effect of effort reeducation on treadmill. Unfortunately, the efficiency of these programs on walking endurance is not well known and results are controversial. Indeed, only two randomized, controlled trials showed improvements of the walking speed and the energy cost of walking.
However, the impact on the 2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT) was contradictory, probably due to the population studied (different EDSS and age) and the training duration (4 weeks Vs 8 weeks). Moreover, in these studies, the effort intensity is most of time determined from an arbitrary percentage of the theoretical maximal heart rate (HR) or the VO2max.
The heart rate corresponding to the level of load of the ventilatory threshold (VT) described by Wasserman and al (1973) could be more efficient to measure the intensity of reeducation, compared to a heart rate (HR) determined from an arbitrary percentage. Four reasons are highlighted:
1. The ventilatory threshold represents a well defined metabolic level (individualized measure)
2. According to the subjects, ventilator threshold is not a constant percentage of "O2max", and suggests that it is also an individualized measure.
3. During the maximal cardiorespiratory effort test, the ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) corresponds to a greater increasing of CO2 compared to O2. The identification of this threshold allows the precise determination of the limit from which the body is incapable of producing the necessary energy to realize an effort using the aerobic metabolism.
4. The VT1 is situated at a level of load with enough intensity for the subject to support the test without dyspnea. A VT1 lower than 40 % of the theoretical VO2 max is considered as a marker of maladjustment to effort due to dyspnea and excessive muscular fatigue. This indication is very informative about the quality of life of patients.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Control
Routine activities
No interventions assigned to this group
Experimental
Effort reeducation program : 3 sessions of 20 minutes per week during 6 weeks
Effort reeducation program
personalized reeducation program at a load level preceding hyperventilation
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Effort reeducation program
personalized reeducation program at a load level preceding hyperventilation
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Expended Disability Status Scale (EDSS) between 4 and 6
* Age between 18 and 65 years old
* No defined relapse of MS for at least 6 weeks
* At least more than 4 weeks since the last corticoids bolus
* Coverage of the social insurance
Exclusion Criteria
* Medical history of orthopaedic or and rheumatologic invalidating
* Contraindications to test effort, after a cardiological consultation and ECG
* Cardiovascular and respiratory diseases not stabilized
* Osteo-articular diseases not stabilized
* Pregnant or breast-feeding woman
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Lille Catholic University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Caroline Massot, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Amiens
Amiens, Hauts-de-France, France
Centre Jacques Calvé
Berck, Hauts-de-France, France
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille
Lille, Hauts-de-France, France
Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille
Lille, Hauts-de-France, France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2016-A00745-46
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
RC-P0048
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.