Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Does cognitive performance explain the gap between physiological and perceived fall-risk in people with multiple sclerosis?

  • Tobia Zanotto
  • , Danya Pradeep Kumar
  • , Daniel Golan
  • , Jeffrey Wilken
  • , Glen M. Doniger
  • , Myassar Zarif
  • , Barbara Bumstead
  • , Marijean Buhse
  • , Joanna Weller
  • , Sarah A. Morrow
  • , Iris Katharina Penner
  • , Laura Hancock
  • , Thomas J. Covey
  • , Edward Ofori
  • , Daniel S. Peterson
  • , Robert W. Motl
  • , Hans Bogaardt
  • , Marissa Barrera
  • , Riley Bove
  • , Herbert Karpatkin
  • Jacob J. Sosnoff, Mark Gudesblatt
  • University of Kansas
  • Clalit Health Services
  • Technion-Israel Institute of Technology
  • Washington Neuropsychology Research Group
  • Georgetown University
  • NeuroTrax Corporation
  • South Shore Neurologic Associates
  • Western University
  • University of Bern
  • Cleveland Clinic Foundation
  • Arizona State University
  • University of Illinois at Chicago
  • Adelaide University
  • Yeshiva University
  • University of California at San Francisco
  • City University of New York

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Cognitive impairment is linked with increased risk of falls in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), but it is not clear whether cognitive performance may help to account for the discordance between fall-risk due to actual physiological functioning and the individual's perception of their fall-risk. This study examined the relationship between cognitive performance and the concordance/discordance of physiological and perceived fall-risk in pwMS. Methods: : In this single-center cross-sectional analysis of 201 pwMS, proxies for physiological (gait speed) and perceived (Modified Falls Efficacy Scale) fall-risk were collected. Participants were categorized into 4 groups using established cut-off values: high physiological – high perceived (Hphy-Hper), high physiological – low perceived (Hphy-Lper), low physiological – low perceived (Lphy-Lper), and low physiological – high perceived (Lphy-Hper) fall-risk. Cognitive performance was evaluated using the NeuroTrax computerized cognitive battery, which generates a global cognitive score (GCS) as well as scores for individual cognitive domains. Results: Overall, 27.4 % of participants exhibited a discordance between physiological and perceived fall-risk. Individuals with discordant fall-risk did not have worse cognitive scores than individuals with concordant fall-risk, whether GCS or individual cognitive domains. However, among concordant groups, participants in the Hphy-Hper group had worse cognitive scores (GCS) as well as information processing, attention, motor skills, executive function and visual spatial domain scores than participants in the Lphy-Lper group. Conclusion: In this study, one in 4 pwMS had a discordance between their physiological and perceived fall-risk. This discordance was not explained by cognitive performance.

Original languageEnglish
Article number106322
JournalMultiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders
Volume95
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2025

Keywords

  • Accidental falls
  • Cognitive dysfunction
  • Multiple sclerosis
  • Rehabilitation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Does cognitive performance explain the gap between physiological and perceived fall-risk in people with multiple sclerosis?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this