Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33109516›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2020

Experiences of patients and physiotherapists with blended internet-based vestibular rehabilitation: a qualitative interview study.

Vincent A van Vugt, Anja JThCM de Kruif, Johannes C van der Wouden, Henriëtte E van der Horst, Otto R Maarsingh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Vincent A van VugtDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands v.vanvugt@vumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2746-4820
Anja JThCM de KruifDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Johannes C van der WoudenDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Henriëtte E van der HorstDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Otto R MaarsinghDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLDepartment of Medical Sciences · BY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternet-based vestibular rehabilitation (VR) with physiotherapy support, known as blended VR, was effective in reducing vestibular symptoms in a recent randomised controlled trial. Blended VR is a complex intervention comprised of physiotherapeutic visits, the vertigo training website, and VR exercises. Because of these interacting components, it is important to understand how blended VR works, for whom it works best, and how it should ideally be delivered.

aimTo investigate the experiences of both patients and physiotherapists with blended internet-based VR. DESIGN &

settingA qualitative interview study was performed with patients who received blended internet-based VR with physiotherapy support, and physiotherapists who provided this support.

methodSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 patients and eight physiotherapists after the 6-month follow-up of the randomised trial. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed.

resultsAccording to both patients and physiotherapists, the physiotherapist visits were useful in providing personal attention, helping patients safely execute exercises, and improving patients' adherence to therapy. Some patients said they did not need physiotherapist support and, according to physiotherapists, both the necessity and the optimal way to deliver guidance differed greatly between patients. The Vertigo Training website and exercises provided patients with a sense of control over their symptoms. Patients reported that the VR exercises were easy to perform and most patients continued to use them long after the trial ended.

conclusionIn blended VR, physiotherapeutic visits appear to offer benefits above the vertigo training website and VR exercises alone. Physiotherapy support may best be used when individually tailored.

Indexed as

blended caredizzinessgeneral practiceinternet-based vestibular rehabilitationprimary health carequalitative researchvertigovestibular symptoms

Identifiers

PMID33109516
PMCPMC7880187
OpenAlexW3096708900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.