Cargando…

Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: We created a clinical virtual reality application for vestibular rehabilitation. Our app targets contextual sensory integration (C.S.I.) where patients are immersed in safe, increasingly challenging environments while practicing various tasks (e.g., turning, walking). The purpose of this...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kelly, Jennifer, Harel, Daphna, Krishnamoorthy, Santosh, Fu, Gene, Morris, Brittani, Medlin, Andrew, Mischinati, Sarah, Wang, Zhu, Sutera, John, Perlin, Ken, Cosetti, Maura, Lubetzky, Anat V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10422780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37568216
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-023-01224-6
_version_ 1785089296870408192
author Kelly, Jennifer
Harel, Daphna
Krishnamoorthy, Santosh
Fu, Gene
Morris, Brittani
Medlin, Andrew
Mischinati, Sarah
Wang, Zhu
Sutera, John
Perlin, Ken
Cosetti, Maura
Lubetzky, Anat V.
author_facet Kelly, Jennifer
Harel, Daphna
Krishnamoorthy, Santosh
Fu, Gene
Morris, Brittani
Medlin, Andrew
Mischinati, Sarah
Wang, Zhu
Sutera, John
Perlin, Ken
Cosetti, Maura
Lubetzky, Anat V.
author_sort Kelly, Jennifer
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We created a clinical virtual reality application for vestibular rehabilitation. Our app targets contextual sensory integration (C.S.I.) where patients are immersed in safe, increasingly challenging environments while practicing various tasks (e.g., turning, walking). The purpose of this pilot study was to establish the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial comparing C.S.I. training to traditional vestibular rehabilitation. METHODS: Thirty patients with vestibular dysfunction completed the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC), Visual Vertigo Analog Scale (VVAS), Functional Gait Assessment (FGA), Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG), and Four-Square Step Test (FSST). Following initial assessment, the patients were randomized into 8 weeks (once per week in clinic + home exercise program) of traditional vestibular rehabilitation or C.S.I. training. Six patients had to stop participation due to the covid-19 pandemic, 6 dropped out for other reasons (3 from each group). Ten patients in the traditional group and 8 in the C.S.I group completed the study. We applied an intention to treat analysis. RESULTS: Following intervention, we observed a significant main effect of time with no main effect of group or group by time interaction for the DHI (mean difference − 18.703, 95% CI [-28.235, -9.172], p = 0.0002), ABC (8.556, [0.938, 16.174], p = 0.028), VVAS, (-13.603, [-25.634, -1.573], p = 0.027) and the FGA (6.405, [4.474, 8.335], p < 0.0001). No changes were observed for TUG and FSST. CONCLUSION: Patients’ symptoms and function improved following either vestibular rehabilitation method. C.S.I training appeared comparable but not superior to traditional rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study (NCT04268745) was registered on clincaltrials.gov and can be found at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04268745. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12984-023-01224-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10422780
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104227802023-08-13 Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial Kelly, Jennifer Harel, Daphna Krishnamoorthy, Santosh Fu, Gene Morris, Brittani Medlin, Andrew Mischinati, Sarah Wang, Zhu Sutera, John Perlin, Ken Cosetti, Maura Lubetzky, Anat V. J Neuroeng Rehabil Research BACKGROUND: We created a clinical virtual reality application for vestibular rehabilitation. Our app targets contextual sensory integration (C.S.I.) where patients are immersed in safe, increasingly challenging environments while practicing various tasks (e.g., turning, walking). The purpose of this pilot study was to establish the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial comparing C.S.I. training to traditional vestibular rehabilitation. METHODS: Thirty patients with vestibular dysfunction completed the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC), Visual Vertigo Analog Scale (VVAS), Functional Gait Assessment (FGA), Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG), and Four-Square Step Test (FSST). Following initial assessment, the patients were randomized into 8 weeks (once per week in clinic + home exercise program) of traditional vestibular rehabilitation or C.S.I. training. Six patients had to stop participation due to the covid-19 pandemic, 6 dropped out for other reasons (3 from each group). Ten patients in the traditional group and 8 in the C.S.I group completed the study. We applied an intention to treat analysis. RESULTS: Following intervention, we observed a significant main effect of time with no main effect of group or group by time interaction for the DHI (mean difference − 18.703, 95% CI [-28.235, -9.172], p = 0.0002), ABC (8.556, [0.938, 16.174], p = 0.028), VVAS, (-13.603, [-25.634, -1.573], p = 0.027) and the FGA (6.405, [4.474, 8.335], p < 0.0001). No changes were observed for TUG and FSST. CONCLUSION: Patients’ symptoms and function improved following either vestibular rehabilitation method. C.S.I training appeared comparable but not superior to traditional rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study (NCT04268745) was registered on clincaltrials.gov and can be found at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04268745. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12984-023-01224-6. BioMed Central 2023-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10422780/ /pubmed/37568216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-023-01224-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Kelly, Jennifer
Harel, Daphna
Krishnamoorthy, Santosh
Fu, Gene
Morris, Brittani
Medlin, Andrew
Mischinati, Sarah
Wang, Zhu
Sutera, John
Perlin, Ken
Cosetti, Maura
Lubetzky, Anat V.
Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial
title Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial
title_full Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial
title_short Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial
title_sort contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10422780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37568216
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-023-01224-6
work_keys_str_mv AT kellyjennifer contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hareldaphna contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT krishnamoorthysantosh contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT fugene contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT morrisbrittani contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT medlinandrew contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mischinatisarah contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT wangzhu contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT suterajohn contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT perlinken contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT cosettimaura contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lubetzkyanatv contextualsensoryintegrationtrainingvstraditionalvestibularrehabilitationapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial