OBJECTIVE: Although vestibular rehabilitation (VR) is gaining popularity, few data support its utility in improving locomotor stability, and no good predictors exist of whom will benefit most. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial of vestibular rehabilitation was conducted at a large tertiary care hospital on 124 patients (59 +/- 18 years old) with unilateral (n = 51) or bilateral (n = 73) vestibular hypofunction, of whom 86 completed a 12-week intervention. Of these 86, 27 returned for long-term (1-year) follow-up testing. The primary outcome measure was locomotor stability. RESULTS: Group A (6 weeks of VR) significantly (P < 0.01) increased their gait velocity and stability compared with group B (6 weeks of strengthening exercise), but there was a smaller difference (P = 0.05) between groups at 12 weeks, when both had had VR; there were no group differences at 1 year. Of the 86 who completed the intervention, 52 (61%) had clear locomotor gains. CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE: VR is helpful for most patients in providing locomotor stability, but further work is needed to determine the factors that prevent VR from being effective for all patients with vestibulopathy.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Although vestibular rehabilitation (VR) is gaining popularity, few data support its utility in improving locomotor stability, and no good predictors exist of whom will benefit most. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial of vestibular rehabilitation was conducted at a large tertiary care hospital on 124 patients (59 +/- 18 years old) with unilateral (n = 51) or bilateral (n = 73) vestibular hypofunction, of whom 86 completed a 12-week intervention. Of these 86, 27 returned for long-term (1-year) follow-up testing. The primary outcome measure was locomotor stability. RESULTS: Group A (6 weeks of VR) significantly (P < 0.01) increased their gait velocity and stability compared with group B (6 weeks of strengthening exercise), but there was a smaller difference (P = 0.05) between groups at 12 weeks, when both had had VR; there were no group differences at 1 year. Of the 86 who completed the intervention, 52 (61%) had clear locomotor gains. CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE: VR is helpful for most patients in providing locomotor stability, but further work is needed to determine the factors that prevent VR from being effective for all patients with vestibulopathy.
Authors: Courtney D Hall; Susan J Herdman; Susan L Whitney; Stephen P Cass; Richard A Clendaniel; Terry D Fife; Joseph M Furman; Thomas S D Getchius; Joel A Goebel; Neil T Shepard; Sheelah N Woodhouse Journal: J Neurol Phys Ther Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Bara A Alsalaheen; Susan L Whitney; Gregory F Marchetti; Joseph M Furman; Anthony P Kontos; Michael W Collins; Patrick J Sparto Journal: Pediatr Phys Ther Date: 2014 Impact factor: 3.049
Authors: Mark Obermann; Eva Bock; Nikolay Sabev; Nils Lehmann; Ralph Weber; Marcus Gerwig; Markus Frings; Diana Arweiler-Harbeck; Stephan Lang; Hans-Christoph Diener Journal: J Neurol Date: 2015-06-20 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Bara A Alsalaheen; Susan L Whitney; Anne Mucha; Laura O Morris; Joseph M Furman; Patrick J Sparto Journal: Physiother Res Int Date: 2012-07-12
Authors: Dara Meldrum; Susan Herdman; Roisin Moloney; Deirdre Murray; Douglas Duffy; Kareena Malone; Helen French; Stephen Hone; Ronan Conroy; Rory McConn-Walsh Journal: BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord Date: 2012-03-26