Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2023
Contextual sensory integration training vs. traditional vestibular rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Vestibular Rehabilitation Utilizing Virtual Environments to Train Sensory Integration for Postural Control in a Functional Context
Combined Effects Of Sensory Integration And Vestibular Exercises On Dizziness, Fall Risk And Quality Of Life In Post-Stroke Patients
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can virtual reality replace conventional vestibular rehabilitation tools in multisensory balance exercises for vestibular disorders? A non-inferiority study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Decrease in head sway as a measure of sensory integration following vestibular rehabilitation: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of vestibular research : equilibrium & orientation · 2023Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe 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.
methodsThirty 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.
resultsFollowing 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.
conclusionPatients' symptoms and function improved following either vestibular rehabilitation method. C.S.I training appeared comparable but not superior to traditional rehabilitation.
trial registrationThis study (NCT04268745) was registered on clincaltrials.gov and can be found at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04268745 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.