Cargando…

Vestibular rehabilitation for persons with stroke and concomitant dizziness—a pilot study

BACKGROUND: Dizziness is common among patients with first time stroke. It affects self-perceived health and is a risk factor for falls. Vestibular rehabilitation (VR) is effective for treating dizziness among various conditions, but the effect of dizziness with origin in the central nervous system i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ekvall Hansson, Eva, Pessah-Rasmussen, Hélène, Bring, Annika, Vahlberg, Birgit, Persson, Liselott
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7526152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33005434
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-00690-2
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Dizziness is common among patients with first time stroke. It affects self-perceived health and is a risk factor for falls. Vestibular rehabilitation (VR) is effective for treating dizziness among various conditions, but the effect of dizziness with origin in the central nervous system is poorly studied. This pilot study of a randomized controlled trial aimed at investigating a vestibular rehabilitation programme among patients with first time stroke and concomitant dizziness. A second aim was to study the feasibility of performing the randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The participants were computer generated randomized to either an intervention or a control group. The intervention comprised of four different vestibular rehabilitation exercises, adapted for each patient and usual rehabilitation. The control group received usual rehabilitation without the vestibular rehabilitation exercises. Outcome measures used were The Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale, the Berg Balance Scale, the Functional Gait Assessment Scale and the EuroQol-5D. Feasibility was studied in terms of recruitment, adherence and retention rates, also as the ability to collect primary and secondary outcomes as well as to find indications of treatment differences. RESULTS: Self-rated health improved for all participants. No other differences between baseline and follow-up were detected neither within nor between groups. Recruitment rate was 23%, adherence to the intervention 90%, retention rate 69% and ability to collect outcome measures 90%. No adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Both the intervention and the control groups improved in self-perceived health. The measures of feasibility were satisfactory in this study, apart from a low recruitment rate.