The Effects of Vibro-Tactile Biofeedback Balance Training on Balance Control and Dizziness in Patients with Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness (PPPD)

Background: Patients with persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) frequently report having problems with balance control. Artificial systems providing vibro-tactile feedback (VTfb) of trunk sway to the patient could aid recalibration of “falsely” programmed natural sensory signal gains underlying unstable balance control and dizziness. Thus, the question we examine, retrospectively, is whether such artificial systems improve balance control in PPPD patients and simultaneously reduce the effects of dizziness on their living circumstances. Therefore, we assessed in PPPD patients the effects of VTfb of trunk sway on balance control during stance and gait tests, and on their perceived dizziness. Methods: Balance control was assessed in 23 PPPD patients (11 of primary PPPD origin) using peak-to-peak amplitudes of trunk sway measured in the pitch and roll planes with a gyroscope system (SwayStar™) during 14 stance and gait tests. The tests included standing eyes closed on foam, walking tandem steps, and walking over low barriers. The measures of trunk sway were combined into a Balance Control Index (BCI) and used to determine whether the patient had a quantified balance deficit (QBD) or dizziness only (DO). The Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) was used to assess perceived dizziness. The subjects first underwent a standard balance assessment from which the VTfb thresholds in eight directions, separated by 45 deg, were calculated for each assessment test based on the 90% range of the trunk sway angles in the pitch and roll directions for the test. A headband-mounted VTfb system, connected to the SwayStar™, was active in one of the eight directions when the threshold for that direction was exceeded. The subjects trained for 11 of the 14 balance tests with VTfb twice per week for 30 min over a total of 2 consecutive weeks. The BCI and DHI were reassessed each week and the thresholds were reset after the first week of training. Results: On average, the patients showed an improved balance control in the BCI values after 2 weeks of VTfb training (24% p = 0.0001). The improvement was greater for the QBD patients than for the DO patients (26 vs. 21%), and greater for the gait tests than the stance tests. After 2 weeks, the mean BCI values of the DO patients, but not the QBD patients, were significantly less (p = 0.0008) than the upper 95% limit of normal age-matched reference values. A subjective benefit in balance control was spontaneously reported by 11 patients. Lower (36%), but less significant DHI values were also achieved after VTfb training (p = 0.006). The DHI changes were identical for the QBD and DO patients and approximately equal to the minimum clinical important difference. Conclusions: These initial results show, as far as we are aware for the first time, that providing VTfb of trunk sway to PPPD subjects yields a significant improvement in balance control, but a far less significant change in DHI-assessed dizziness. The intervention benefitted the gait trials more than the stance trials and benefited the QBD group of PPPD patients more than the DO group. This study increases our understanding of the pathophysiologic processes underlying PPPD and provides a basis for future interventions.