High‐frequency motor rehabilitation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a randomized clinical trial. Issue 5 (18th March 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zucchi, Elisabetta; Vinceti, Marco; Malagoli, Carlotta; Fini, Nicola; Gessani, Annalisa; Fasano, Antonio; Rizzi, Romana; Sette, Elisabetta; Cavazza, Stefano; Fiocchi, Alena; Buja, Sergio; Faccioli, Tiziana; Storani, Simone; Mandrioli, Jessica
• Is Part Of: Annals of clinical and translational neurology. Volume 6:Issue 5(2019)
• Page Start: 893
• Page End: 901
• Publication Date: 2019-03-18
• Subjects: Nervous system -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Neurology -- Periodicals; 616.8005
• DOI: 10.1002/acn3.765
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2328-9503

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: Exercise may be physically and psychologically important for people with ALS, especially in the earlier stages of the disease, and, as a consequence, current ALS clinical management includes individualized rehabilitation as part of multidisciplinary care because. However, while recent studies focused on which type of exercise is more indicated to ALS patients, there is no evidence at which frequency training sessions should be performed. Methods: We performed an assessor blinded randomized clinical trial to investigate the superiority of two different frequencies of exercise on rate of progression in ALS. We enrolled 65 patients in two groups: intensive exercise regimen (IER, five sessions/week) versus usual exercise regimen (UER, two sessions/week). The primary aim was to assess if IER decreased disease progression, measured through Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale‐Revised, with respect to UER. Secondary aims included assessment of adverse events, tracheostomy‐free survival, motor and respiratory functions, fatigue, quality of life and caregiver burden. Treatment regimen consisted for both groups of the same kind of exercise including aerobic training, endurance training, stretching or assisted active mobilization, differing for frequency of intervention. Results: No significant changes in disease progression were found in patients under IER versus UER. At the end of the study, there were no significant differences between the two groups in survival, respiratory function, time to supporting procedures, and quality of life. Adverse events, fatigue, and caregiver burden were not different between the two treatment regimens. Conclusions: Despite some limitations, our trial demonstrated that high‐frequency physical exercise was not superior to UER on ALSFRS‐R scores, motor and respiratory functions, survival, fatigue, and quality of life of ALS patients.