Dynamic Cognitive–Motor Training versus Cognitive Computer-Based Training in People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Preliminary Randomized Controlled Trial with 2-Month Follow-Up

Background: Recent studies underscore the intricate relationship between cognitive and motor impairments in Multiple Sclerosis (MS), often exacerbated by CNS damage compromising neural connections. These cognitive-motor deficits contribute to reduced efficiency in daily activities and heightened risks of falls and accidents. The combination of challenging cognitive-motor training in a more ecological setting could improve cognitive functions in people with MS (PwMS). Objective: This study aims to compare the impact of dynamic cognitive-motor training versus computer-based cognitive training on overall cognitive efficiency in PwMS. Methods: Thirty-eight PwMS were recruited through the neurorehabilitation services of an Institute of research and health. Twenty-four participants were randomly assigned to the Cognitive-Motor group (CMg) and Cognitive Therapy group (CTg). Participants underwent three training sessions per week for four weeks, each lasting 50 min. The primary outcome was a comprehensive cognitive assessment using the Cognitive Impairment Index (CII), and the secondary outcomes were the Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life Questionnaire MSQOL-54 and the Stroop Color Word Interference Test (SCWT). Results: Significant differences in the CII scores across T0, T1, and T2, as indicated by Friedman's test (χ2(2) = 14.558, p = .001), were found in the CMg. A significant difference in the change in health subscale of the MSQOL-54 was observed when comparing the groups across T0, T1, and T2 (χ2(2) = 6.059, p = .048). There were also statistically significant differences for the emotional well-being (χ2(2) = 7.581, p = .023) and health distress (χ2(2) = 11.902, p = .003) subscales. Post hoc analysis showed a statistically significant improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for the former at T1 vs. T0 (Z = -2.502, p = .012 and for the latter at T2 vs. T0 (Z = -2.670, p = .008), respectively. Conclusions: Our results support the combination of cognitive-motor training to enhance cognitive functional outcomes and quality of life compared to computer-based cognitive training in PwMS.