Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug 30;10(17):3916.
doi: 10.3390/jcm10173916.

The Level of Stress and Coping Strategies in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis and Their Relationships with the Disease Course

Roman Kotas  1 , Marta Nowakowska-Kotas  2 , Sławomir Budrewicz  2 , Anna Pokryszko-Dragan  2
Affiliations

The Level of Stress and Coping Strategies in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis and Their Relationships with the Disease Course

Roman Kotas et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Objectives: Stress is supposed to be linked with a background of multiple sclerosis (MS) and the disease course.

Design: The study aimed to assess the level of stress and coping strategies in MS patients within a year of follow-up and to investigate the relationships between these aspects and factors related-or not-to MS.

Methods: In 65 patients with MS, the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10), Type D Scale (DS14) and Coping Orientations to Problems Experienced (COPE) were performed at baseline and after a year. Baseline PSS-10, DS-14 and COPE scores were analyzed with regard to demographics, MS duration, treatment, indices of disability and self-reported stressful events (SEs). Final PSS-10 and COPE results were analyzed with reference to MS activity and SE within a year of follow-up.

Results: Initially, 67% of patients reported a moderate or high level of stress and 31% met Type-D personality criteria. Diverse coping strategies were preferred, most of which were problem-focused. The negative affectivity DS-14 subscore (NEG) was correlated with disability level. Non-health-related SEs were associated with higher PSS-10 and NEG scores. After a year, the mean PSS-10 score decreased, while COPE results did not change significantly. Non-health-related SEs were associated with a higher PSS-10 score and less frequent use of acceptance and humor strategies. Those with an active vs. stable MS course during the follow-up did not differ in terms of PSS-10 and COPE results.

Conclusions: MS patients experienced an increased level of stress. No significant relationships were found between stress or coping and MS course within a year. Non-health-related factors affected measures of stress more than MS-related factors.

Keywords: coping strategies; multiple sclerosis; perceived stress; stress; type-D personality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Frequency of coping strategies used in the study group according to COPE results. COPE 1—active coping, COPE 2–planning, COPE 3—seeking social support for instrumental reasons, COPE 4—seeking social support for emotional reasons, COPE 5—suppression of competing activities, COPE 6—turning to religion, COPE 7—positive reinterpretation and growth, COPE 8—restraint coping, COPE 9—acceptance, COPE 10—focus on and venting of emotions, COPE 11–denial, COPE 12—mental disengagement, COPE 13—behavioral disengagement, COPE 14—alcohol-drug disengagement, COPE 15—humor, COPE A—active coping, COPE B—avoidant behavior, COPE C—emotion-focused and seeking support strategy. * — individual scores (other subjects denied any use of alcohol).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Numbers of patients who had no evidence of disease activity (NEDA 1) or presented with clinical and radiological activity measures (NEDA 0) within a year of follow-up.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The use of general coping strategies (according to the COPE) in the study group in the initial and final assessments.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lublin F.D., Reingold S.C., Cohen J.A., Cutter G.R., Thompson A.J., Wolinsky J.S., Banwell B., Barkhof F., Bebo B., Calabresi P.A., et al. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2014;83:278–286. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000560. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Artemiadis A.K., Anagnostouli M.C., Alexopoulos E.C. Stress as a risk factor for multiple sclerosis onset or relapse: A systematic review. Neuroepidemiology. 2011;36:109–120. doi: 10.1159/000323953. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benito-León J. Stress and multiple sclerosis: What’s new? Neuroepidemiology. 2011;36:121–122. doi: 10.1159/000324174. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zänkert S., Bellingrath S., Wüst S., Kudielka B.M. HPA axis responses to psychological challenge linking stress and disease: What do we know on sources of intra- and interindividual variability? Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2019;105:86–97. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2018.10.027. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kern S., Ziemssen T. Brain–immune communication psychoneuroimmunology of multiple sclerosis. Mult. Scler. J. 2008;14:6–21. doi: 10.1177/1352458507079657. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources