Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39935612›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025

Virtual reality-based vestibular rehabilitation therapy in patients with acute unilateral vestibulopathy: a randomized controlled trial.

Jae Woo Lee, Chul Young Yoon, Jae Ha Kim, Young Joon Seo, Tae Hoon Kong

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07703085 ("Effects of Virtual Reality Assisted Vestibular Rehabilitation Versus Conventional Vestibular Rehabilitation on Dizziness, Balance, and Gait in Patients With Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo."), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07703085 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

"Effects of Virtual Reality Assisted Vestibular Rehabilitation Versus Conventional Vestibular Rehabilitation on Dizziness, Balance, and Gait in Patients With Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo."

TypeinterventionalSponsorLahore University of Biological and Applied SciencesRan2026 to 2026Enrolled32ConditionsBenign Proximal Positional Vertigo (BPPV)ArmsVR (VR-Control), Conventional Vestibular Rehabilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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.

Jae Woo LeeDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Republic of Korea.
Chul Young YoonDepartment of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Republic of Korea.
Jae Ha KimDepartment of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Republic of Korea.
Young Joon SeoDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Republic of Korea.
Tae Hoon KongDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Conventional vestibular rehabilitation therapy (VRT) requires significant time and resources, especially for patients with low compliance, limiting its effectiveness and accurate assessment. Studies have shown VRT using virtual reality (VR) to be effective, with meta-analyses confirming its superiority over conventional methods. However, methodological variations in VR remain a limitation. This study aimed to assess the effects of VRT using head-mounted display (HMD) VR technology in patients with acute unilateral vestibulopathy (AUVP) and compare the outcomes with conventional VRT. Methods: We conducted a single-blinded randomized controlled trial with 60 AUVP patients randomly assigned to VR or control groups. The VR group received VRT via VR, while the control group underwent conventional VRT. Both groups followed individual home-based programs for 8 weeks and visited the clinic every 2 weeks. Subjective dizziness symptoms were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), dizziness handicap inventory (DHI), and Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) scale. Compliance with home-based programs was assessed on a 0-2-point scale based on responses in a booklet guide. Results: Seven patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 26 and 27 patients in the VR and control groups, respectively. The mean patient age was 56.91 ± 12.11 years; 22 men and 33 women were included. Two-way repeated measures analysis of variance showed significant improvement in both groups for DHI and ABC scores. However, changes in DHI, VAS, and compliance scores did not differ between groups. Improvement in the physical domain of the DHI and ABC scores was significantly faster in the VR group ( Discussion: VRT using VR technology showed comparable efficacy to conventional VRT in AUVP patients. The VR group demonstrated greater improvement in the physical domain of the DHI and ABC scales, indicating enhanced confidence in movement and reduced perception of physical handicap due to dizziness.

Indexed as

acute unilateral vestibulopathyrandomized controlled trialvestibular neuritisvestibular rehabilitationvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID39935612
PMCPMC11810741

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.