Keywords Polyradiculoneuropathy, Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating - Cognition - Executive
Function
Palavras-chave Polirradiculoneuropatia Desmielinizante Inflamatória Crônica - Cognição - Função Executiva
INTRODUCTION
Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is an autoimmune disease
of the peripheral nerve system (PNS).[1 ] Its prevalence varies according to geographic region, ranging from 1 to 9 cases
in every 100,000 habitants, and affecting males more than females.[2 ]
[3 ] Its presentation is heterogeneous, and effective biomarkers have not been found.[3 ]
[4 ] According to the recently-published criteria by the Joint Task Force of the European
Federation of Neurological Societies and the Peripheral Nerve Society (EFNS/PNS),[5 ] the typical CIDP affects symmetrically distal and proximal muscles with sensory
involvement of at least two limbs, whereas the CIDP variants include various subtypes
with a distinct clinical and electrodiagnostic phenotype.[5 ] It is usually responsive to intravenous human immunoglobulin (IVIg), plasmapheresis,
and immunosuppressants, indicating its autoimmune nature.[6 ] The prognosis depends on the extension of the nerve damage, and it seems unfavorable
when there is concomitant involvement of the central nervous system (CNS).[7 ]
Abnormalities in the CNS on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans have been reported
in patients with CIDP,[2 ]
[8 ]
[9 ]
[10 ]
[11 ]
[12 ]
[13 ] and some studies[9 ]
[14 ] suggest a possible association with multiple sclerosis (MS) due to the presence
of white matter (WM) abnormalities, although no consensus has been reached. In the
literature, the presence of CNS abnormalities on MRI is quite variable, ranging from
5% to 50% of the cases,[8 ]
[9 ]
[10 ]
[11 ]
[12 ] and the consequences of these abnormalities have not been properly addressed.
Processing speed (PS) is the mental speed to operate cognitive functions.[15 ] Studies[16 ]
[17 ]
[18 ]
[19 ] have assumed that PS is a mediating variable to perform cognitive functions, such
as memory and intelligence competence. Additionally, some studies have indicated that
PS measures decrease in some psychiatric and development disorders,[20 ]
[21 ] in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus infection,[22 ] in mild cognitive impairment (MCI),[23 ] and in MS, in which PS is usually severely compromised, and is associated with a
decline in cognitive functions.[24 ] Regarding CIDP and cognition performance, we only found two studies addressing this
subject. One of them[25 ] found PS deficits in CIDP, but there was no evaluation of CNS integrity. More recently,
a study[26 ] evaluated cognition in a group of patients with chronic autoimmune demyelinating
polyneuropathies (CADP) in general, and the authors detected a decrease in PS ability.
Based on the literature, we hypothesized that the PS could be an essential domain
to be investigated in CIDP patients according to the presence or absence of abnormalities
on brain MRI scans.
The Five Digit Test (FDT) was developed by Sedó[27 ] as an instrument based on the Stroop paradigm, and it is used to evaluate the PS
and some domains of executive functions. The FDT consists of reading and counting
numbers and asterisks as fast as possible.[28 ] Slowness in the FDT indicates cognitive damage.[27 ] To the best of our knowledge, this instrument has not yet been used to evaluate
cognition in CIDP. It has the advantage of not demanding hand movements, which are
often impaired in CIDP patients. The present study aimed to evaluate the FDT performance
of CIDP patients according to MRI results. Secondly, through a statistical analysis,
we aimed to determine if patients without MRI abnormalities could present cognitive
impairment measured by the FDT and compare them with patients with alterations on
MRI and controls. The confirmation of any cognitive impairment in CIDP will increase
knowledge and improve the health care and follow-up provided to these patients.
METHODS
Participants and procedures
The Research Ethics Committee of Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade
de São Paulo, Brazil, approved the project (under protocol no. 10.333), and all participants
signed an informed consent form before the experiment were started. The data were
collected between July 2018 and April 2019 at the teaching hospital of the aforementioned
university. A registered psychologist (I.S.) with a specialization in neuropsychology
conducted the neuropsychological evaluation.
Healthy individuals from the community composed the control group (CG). The inclusion
criteria were: preserved independence and functionality; no history of visual and
auditory deficits; no history of any psychiatric or neurological disorders; not taking
any medication that may impact cognition; and no history of alcoholism or drug abuse.
We excluded one volunteer as she declared the use of medicines for migraine without
a proper prescription.
The inclusion criteria for CIDP patients were: CIDP diagnosis according to the Joint
Task Force of the EFNS/PNS;5 absence of psychiatric diseases, except for anxiety and depression; no history of
alcoholism or drug abuse; no intellectual disability; and age between 21 and 59 years.
An expert neurologist (W.M. Jr) reviewed and confirmed all the diagnoses according
to the new recently published criteria.[5 ]
The recruitment of the CIDP patients began with an extensive search in the electronic
database of our hospital. We initially found 240 patients registered as having CIDP.
Only 31 of them were available and fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and 16 agreed
to participate, and undergo an MRI. Only 14 finished the MRI evaluation, as 1 patient
was excluded due to head injury, and another was unable to perform the tests. Only
the patient group underwent the brain MRI. The MRI analysis was performed by a neuroradiologist
(A.C.S), who wrote a report. The neuroradiologist had no information about the results
of the neuropsychological evaluation.
Materials
Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS)
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) is a self-report instrument used
to evaluate symptoms of depression and anxiety. Previous studies[29 ] indicated the cutoffs for the Brazilian version. Due to the sample size and to compare
the groups, we kept all participants, regardless of the cutoff point.
Rasch-built overall disability scale (R-ODS)
The version of the Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale (R-ODS) translated to Brazilian
Portuguese was used to measure the degree of disability. The R-ODS is applied in cases
of immune-mediated peripheral neuropathies,[30 ] and it is a self-report scale with 24 items about daily activities. The alternatives
for the answers vary according to the degree of difficulty, and the maximum score
is 48. The lower the score, the higher the degrre of disability.
FDT
The FDT evaluates the PS and executive function.[27 ] The adopted Brazilian Portuguese version[31 ] was used in the present research. The FDT scores are expressed in seconds. In the
presence of marked sluggishness, the existence of neurocognitive difficulty is confirmed.[31 ] The FDT includes the following tasks: reading and counting (automatic processes),
choosing and shifting (executive functioning), and inhibition and flexibility.[28 ]. Reading and counting are measures of mental speed (PS), while choosing and shifting
are controlled, demanding high-order functions (executive function). The inhibition
and flexibility parts are calculated after the subject finishes the test and are measured
without the PS component using subtractions.[31 ]
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
The report from the routine brain MRI was used as a criterion to separate patients
into two groups: those with (classified as CIDPabnl) and those without (classified
as CIDPnl) CNS abnormalities (specifically in the brain and cerebellum). The 3T MRI
scans included three-dimensional T1-weighted images, three-dimensional fluid attenuated
inversion recovery (FLAIR-3D), axial T2-weighted images, diffusion tensor imaging
(DTI) measurements, and susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI).
Statistical analysis
Statistical analyses were performed by an expert statistician (G.C.R) using the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, United States) software,
version 13.0. The sociodemographic and clinical data were expressed as frequencies
and percentages. Descriptive statistics were expressed as means, standard deviations
and ranges. We used the chi-squared (χ2 ) test and the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test to calculate the differences between
the three groups. For the variables with a significant statistical difference among
the groups, we applied the Dunn post hoc test to identify where these differences
occurred. Then, we used the linear regression analysis method to adjust the variables
that had a significant difference for years of schooling to verify whether the influence
of groups remained in the cognitive variable, even after the adjustment.
We performed the Spearman rank correlation to test the association of FDT tasks with
the other variables: age, years of schooling, disease duration, degree of disability
(measured by the R-ODS), and symptoms of anxiety and depression (measured by HADS
scores).
RESULTS
[Table 1 ] shows the characteristics of the three groups: CIDPabnl (n = 9), CIDPnl (n = 5),
and the controls (n = 24). All patients fulfilled the new criteria for typical CIDP.[5 ] None of the patients had manifestations that could suggest nodo-paranodopathy.
Table 1
Characteristics of the participants of the present study
Total sample
CIDPnl
CIDPabnl
CG
Group differences
Dunn post hoc
N
38
5
9
24
−
−
Male gender: n (%)
22 (57.9%)
4 (80.0%)
6 (66.7%)
12 (50.0%)
χ2 ; p = 0.45
−
Age in years
41.66 (12.04)
[24-59]
42.0 (13.95)
[24-56]
46.22 (12.18)
[24-58]
39.88 (11.67)
[24-59]
χ2 = 1.53; p = 0.46
−
Years of schooling
14.39 (4.42)
[3-24]
11.0 (4.90)
[3-15]
11.11 (4.04)
[4-15]
16.33 (3.32)
[11-24]
χ2 = 11.36; p = 0.003*
CG > CIDPabnl: 0.009*
Disease duration (years)
−
9.20 (5.21)
[2-16]
11.67 (10.61)
[2-38]
−
χ2 = 0.02; p = 0.89
−
HADS A
6.82 (3.41)
[1-14]
7.0 (3.67)
[4-11]
8.67 (3.61)
[5-14]
6.08 (3.16)
[1-14]
χ2 = 3.51; p = 0.17
−
HADS D
4.92 (3.42)
[0-13]
5.0 (3.46)
[2-10]
5.11 (4.04)
[0-12]
4.83 (3.33)
[1-13]
χ2 = 0.01; p = 0.99
−
R-ODS
47.74 (4.84)
[29-50]
48.0 (2.55)
[44-50]
42.0 (7.38)
[29-50]
49.83 (0.38)
[49-50]
χ2 = 20.31; p < 0.001*
CG > CIDPabnl < 0.001*;
CG > CIDPnl 0.05*
Abbreviations: χ2 , Chi-squared test; A, anxiety domain of the HADS; CG, control group; CIDP, chronic
inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy; CIDPabnl, patients with abnormalities on
brain MRI; CIDPnl, patients with normal parameters on brain MRI; D, depression domain
of the HADS; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; R-ODS, Rasch-built Overall
Disability Scale.
Notes: Results are presented as mean (standard deviation [SD]) [range], except for
gender. *p < 0.05.
Clinical characteristics of the CIDPnl
The CIDPnl group was composed of 4 men and 1 woman aged between 24 and 56 (mean = 42;
standard deviation [SD] = 13.95) years. All patients were right-handed. One patient
who was a smoker presented trigeminal nerve thickening on the right side on the brain
MRI. One patient had systemic arterial hypertension (SAH), and another had monoclonal
gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) as a comorbidity. At the time of the
evaluation (the previous three months), four patients were not receiving treatment
for CIDP. The patients interrupted therapy on their own. One patient was receiving
IVIg. [Table 2 ] shows the clinical data for the CIDPnl.
Table 2
Clinical characteristics of CIDPnl patients
n = 5
Cranial nerves involved
Other conditions
Current treatment*
Patient 1
−
−
−
Patient 2
Trigeminal nerve thickening to right
−
−
Patient 3
−
−
−
Patient 4
−
Systemic arterial hypertension
−
Patient 5
−
Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance
Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy
Note: *The previous three months. Untreated patients had not been receiving medication
in the past three months. These patients interrupted treatment on their own.
Clinical characteristics of the CIDPabnl
The CIDPabnl group was composed of 9 individuals aged between 24 and 58 (mean = 46.22;
SD = 12.18) years. One patient was left-handed, and none of them reported smoking.
One patient had SAH, and another one had MGUS. None of the patients met the criteria
for MS. According to the MRI, two patients had trigeminal nerve thickening (patients
3 and 5; [Table 3 ]). Surprisingly, eight patients had some degree of cerebellar atrophy. Besides, microangiopathy
was observed in 2 patients with concomitant cerebellar atrophy (patients 6 and 8).
Patient 6 also presented brain atrophy. Occipital demyelination was described in one
patient. Patient 2, who was 24 years old and severely impaired (difficulty walking
and weak hands), presented a reduction in corpus callosum thickness. Five patients
were treated with IVIg, and 2 patients were on corticosteroid therapy (patients 3
and 5). Two patients were taking gabapentin or carbamazepine to relieve pain (patients
4 and 7). [Table 3 ] displays the clinical characteristics of the CIDPabnl. [Figure 1 ] shows the brain MRI of two patients, one classified as CIDPnl and another, as CIDPabnl
(patients 1 and 6 respectively).
Figure 1. Sagittal and axial brain MRI scans of two CIDP patients. (A-C ) Structural damage: brain and cerebellar atrophy in a patient classified as CIDPabnl
(patient 6). (D-F ) Normal MRI of one CIDP patient with normal parameters in MRI (patient 1).
Table 3
Characterization of the MRI report of the CIDPabnl group
n = 9
MRI report/CNS involvement
Cranial nerves involved
Other conditions
Current
treatment*
Patient 1
Cerebellar atrophy
−
Systemic arterial hypertension
Intravenous immunoglobulin
Patient 2
Mild cerebellar atrophy, reduction in corpus callosum thickness
−
−
Intravenous immunoglobulin
Patient 3
Cerebellar atrophy
Trigeminal nerve
Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance
Methylprednisolone
Patient 4
periarteriolar demyelinatin features
−
−
Gabapentin
Patient 5
occipital demyelination
Trigeminal nerve
−
Methylprednisolone
Patient 6
Cerebellar atrophy, brain atrophy, microangiopathy
−
−
Intravenous immunoglobulin
Patient 7
Cerebellar atrophy
−
−
Carbamazepine
Patient 8
Cerebral parenchyma, microangiopathy
−
−
Intravenous immunoglobulin
Patient 9
Cerebellar atrophy
−
−
Intravenous immunoglobulin
Note: *The last three months; Only the principal treatment is described.
Differences between groups
There were no differences among the groups regarding gender distribution, age and
HADS scores ([Table 1 ]). The sample was statistically different in terms of years of schooling, and the
value for the CG was significantly higher than that of CIDPabnl (p = 0.009). The disability measure (R-ODS) presented significant difference among the
groups, with the controls performing better than both the CIDPabnl (p < 0.001) and CIDPnl (p = 0.05).
[Table 4 ] shows the FDT data. The case groups had a statistically inferior performance than
the controls regarding automatic process measures (reading and counting). The controls
were statistically faster in the FDT choosing task than the case groups. In the FDT
shifting, we found differences between the CIDPabnl and the CG (p = 0.03). In the flexibility and inhibition measures, there were no differences. After
controlling for years of schooling, the differences remaining for the FDT were: reading
for the CIDPnl (p = 0.03), counting for the CIDPabnl (p = 0.001), and choosing for the CIDPnl (p = 0.004).
Table 4
Data from the Five Digit Test
FDT tasks
CIDPnl
(n = 5)
CIDPabnl
(n = 9)
CG
(n = 24)
Non-parametric test comparing groupsa
Adjustment for schooling by the linear regression modelb
Group differences
Dunn post hoc
Beta
p
Processing speed – automatic process measures
Reading
31.8 (7.5)
[22-39]
29.22 (6.06)
[24-44]
22.08 (4.54)
[13-28]
χ2 = 13.21; p = 0.001*
CIDPabnl > CG: 0.006*;
CIDPnl > CG: 0.05
CIDPabnl
0.23
0.12
CIDPnl
0.31
0.03*
Counting
30.4 (2.97)
[26-33]
33.89 (7.02)
[27-46]
24.0 (3.88)
[17-32]
χ2 = 18.41; p < 0.001*
CIDPabnl > CG: < 0.001*;
CIDPnl > CG: 0.02*
CIDPabnl
0.45
0.001*
CIDPnl
0.16
0.18
Executive functions – controlled process measures
Choosing
61.8 (28.92)
[40-110]
49.67 (12.24)
[32-69]
37.83 (7.73)
[24-52]
χ2 = 10.69; p = 0.005*
CIDPabnl > CG: 0.03*;
CIDPnl > CG: 0.05
CIDPabnl
0.02
0.91
CIDPnl
0.27
0.04*
Shifting
76.4 (42.58)
[45-148]
61.67 (17.76)
[41-99]
49.75 (11.76)
[29-77]
χ2 = 6.21; p = 0.05
CIDPabnl > CG: 0.03*
CIDPabnl
−0.53
0.73
CIDPnl
0.19
0.2
Inhibition
30 (23.91)
[15-72]
20.44 (9.19)
[8-38]
15.79 (7.18)
[2-29]
χ2 = 3.55; p = 0.16
−
−
−
−
Flexibility
44.6 (37.6)
[19-110]
32.44 (15.52)
[17-70]
27.67 (11.45)
[14-52]
χ2 = 1.81; p = 0.40
−
−
−
−
Shifting errors
2.2 (3.19)
[0-7]
2.33 (2.64)
[0-8]
0.37 (0.71)
[0-2]
χ2 = 6.7; p = 0.03*
CIDPabnl > CG: 0.05
CIDPabnl
0.21
0.21
CIDPnl
0.14
0.37
Abbreviations: χ2 , Chi-squared test; CG, control group; CIDP, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy;
CIDPabnl, CIDP with abnormal brain MRI; CIDPnl, CIDP with normal brain MRI; FDT, Five
Digit Test.
Notes: Results are presented as mean (standard deviation [SD]) [range]. a Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn post hoc tests. b Only performed when there was a significant difference. The errors in reading, counting,
and choosing were not presented. There were no statistically significant dofferences
regarding errors in reading, counting and choosing. *p < 0.05.
Correlation analysis
[Table 5 ] displays all correlation analyses performed. We found significant and positive correlations
between age and FDT counting (r = 0.36; p = 0.03), age and FDT shifting (r = 0.33; p = 0.04), and age and FDT flexibility (r = 0.34; p = 0.04). Years of schooling presented negative correlations with all FDT domains.
There was no significant correlation between FDT and disease duration. The R-ODS score
was negatively correlated with FDT reading (r = −0.47; p = 0.003), FDT counting (r = −0.53; p = 0.001) and FDT choosing (r = −0.41; p = 0.01). Regarding anxiety and depression symptoms, we found only one significant
correlation with anxiety scores (r = 0.37; p = 0.02).
Table 5
Correlations between FDT domains and measures of disability, anxiety symptoms, depressions
symptoms, and years of schooling
n = 38
Schooling
R-ODS
HADS A
HADS D
FDT reading
r = −0,50;
p = 0.001*
r = −0.47;
p = 0.003*
r = 0.06;
p = 0.72
r = −0.07;
p = 0.69
FDT counting
r = −0.68;
p < 0.001*
r = −0.53;
p = 0.001*
r = 0.37;
p = 0.02*
r = 0.16;
p = 0.32
FDT choosing
r = −0.65;
p < 0.001*
r = −0.41;
p = 0.01*
r = 0.11;
p = 0.51
r = −0.02;
p = 0.89
FDT shifting
r = −0.60;
p < 0.001*
r = −0.19;
p = 0.26
r = 0.07;
p = 0.69
r = 0.08;
p = 0.62
FDT inhibition
r = −0.50;
p = 0.002*
r = −0.15;
p = 0.37
r = 0.10;
p = 0.56
r = 0.02;
p = 0.90
FDT flexibility
r = −0.38;
p = 0.02*
r = 0.02*;
p = 0.89
r = 0.01*;
p = 0.93
r = 0.10;
p = 0.57
Abbreviations: A, anxiety domain of the HADS; D, depression domain of the HADS; FDT,
Five Digit Test; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; R-ODS, Rasch-built Overall
Disability Scale.
Note: *Significant rank-order correlation at p < 0.05.
DISCUSSION
One crucial measure evaluated by the FDT is the PS, which may be slowed in neurological
conditions.[17 ]
[18 ]
[19 ] As there is no demand for hand function to complete this test, it is particularly
useful in CIDP. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate cognitive function
in CIDP measuring the PS and executive function through the FDT in patients with normal
and abnormal brain images. The main findings of the present study were: both case
groups presented lower PS; the abnormalities found on MRI did not explain the observed
slowdown in the PS; and there was no difference between patients and controls in the
flexibility and inhibition domains, which are measures derived after exclusion of
PS interference.
Deficits in PS in CIDP patients have already been reported,[25 ] and they are attributed to CNS damage. The present study however, demonstrated that
PS underperformance was also present in patients with normal brain MRIs. Together,
these findings support the presence of slowness in cognitive processing in CIDP patients,
regardless of visible abnormalities on brain MRI scans. Moreover, a recent investigation[27 ] linked the decline in PS to a dysfunction in the blood-brain barrier (BBB) in certain
CADP patients. Similarly, inflammatory conditions have been described as impacting
PS and cognition.[32 ] A similar mechanism may exist in CIDP. Inflammatory mechanisms could be present
in our CIDPnl patients, impacting PS without evidence of structural changes on routine
MRI. Future research could investigate inflammatory markers associated with cognitive
functions in CIDP.
During the FDT tasks, the subject looks at the stimuli and emits a verbal response,
which was slow in the patient groups. It is possible that changes in the peripheral
input may play a role. Studies[33 ] with visual evoked potential (VEP) indicated abnormalities in some CIDP patients.
Another VEP study[34 ] recently revealed the possibility of central sensory involvement correlated with
the degree of peripheral nerve impairment in CIDP. This could indicate that the damage
in the periphery impacts PS, increasing the time to accomplish the task. To confirm
it, the VEP should be performed in future studies. Thus, one hypothesis is that the
PNS damage decreases the afferent impulses, reducing the necessary drive to trigger
a fast voluntary motor response.
The FDT choosing task is a measure of attention, a component of executive functions.
After controlling for years of schooling, only the CIDPnl group presented lower values.
This finding confirms a preliminary report[35 ] in which the authors examined seven CIDP patients with normal MRI scans and demonstrated
deficits in selective and divided attention. In the present study, the first statistical
analysis showed differences in FDT shifting for the CIDPabnl, but no difference was
found when controlled for years of schooling. It was an unexpected result, since almost
all CIDPabnl patients presented cerebellar atrophy (except patient number 8). The
extension of the cerebellar atrophy may not be enough to reflect on the executive
function domains in this sample. This could be investigated in future research, since
the cerebellum has been implicated in executive functions.[36 ] Also, two out of nine CIDPabnl patients were taking corticosteroids. It is recognized
that corticosteroids can impact cognitive abilities, especially executive function,[37 ] but this was not reflected in our sample. Our data on the executive functions measured
by the FDT were heterogeneous. They may reflect the educational characteristics of
the sample or point to heterogeneity in cognitive domains.
The inhibition and flexibility measures, which were calculated without PS interference,
were diminished in both groups of patients. This could reinforce the PS as a central
deficit in CIDP, indicating the need for follow-up and the possibility of subclinical
damage. Also, the disability was negatively correlated with all FDT measures impacted
after the correction for years of schooling (reading, counting, and choosing). This
suggests that the PS performs a critical role in these patients. Future research could
associate the FDT times with VEPs and the degree of peripheral nerve impairment.
One study[38 ] reported depression in CIDP patients; in the present study, there was no significant
difference between patients and controls regarding to the anxiety and depression domains
of the HADS. Note that, in the present study, some participants had exceeded the cut-off
point for the HADS, but we kept them in the statistical analysis because there was
no difference among the groups. Previous studies had reported that the mood could
negatively affect PS measures,[39 ] but there was only one correlation between the anxiety domain of the HADS and FDT
counting in our sample. For future research, it is crucial to consider these variables.
This present study is the first to analyze FDT performance in CIDP patients and to
compare the possible alterations in the brain/cerebellum according to routine MRIs.
However, our research has some limitations: the first is the difference in the level
of schooling among the groups. We had difficulty getting a paired control group. When
we statistically controlled this variable, the results were heterogeneous for the
executive function domain. Secondly, the sample size is small, and we cannot perform
statistical analyses to evaluate the association between therapy type and FDT performance.
Third, we kept all participants regardless of the cut-offs for the HADS due to our
sample size. We consider that data DTI and VEP data and their correlation with the
PS measure could be used in future research. Additionally, studies correlating BBB
integrity and PS could be carried out with a longitudinal and multicenter design.
We emphasize that neuromuscular, autoimmune, and demyelinating disorders can present
neuropsychological aspects that should be considered by health professionals.
In conclusion, the present study provides preliminary evidence for the slowness in
PS tasks of the FDT in CIDP patients. Since some CIDP patients have limitations regarding
hand movements, the FDT seems be useful to evaluate PS and executive function in this
population. Our results suggest that PS is a relevant domain to be evaluated in these
patients. Longitudinal studies are necessary to evaluate PS as subclinical damage
in this population.
