Kontos AP, Eagle SR, Mucha A, Kochick V, Reichard J, Moldolvan C, Holland CL, Blaney NA, Collins MW. A Randomized Controlled Trial of Precision Vestibular Rehabilitation in Adolescents following Concussion: Preliminary Findings.
J Pediatr 2021;
239:193-199. [PMID:
34450120 DOI:
10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.08.032]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2021] [Revised: 07/30/2021] [Accepted: 08/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness of a 4-week precision vestibular rehabilitation intervention compared with a behavioral management control intervention for adolescents with vestibular symptoms/impairment within 21 days of a concussion.
STUDY DESIGN
This study used double-blind, randomized controlled trial design involving adolescent (12-18 years) patients with a diagnosed sport/recreation-related concussion with vestibular symptoms/impairment from a concussion-specialty clinic between October 2018 and February 2020. Eligible participants were randomized in a 1:1 to either a 4-week vestibular intervention group (VESTIB) or a behavioral management control group (CONTROL). CONTROLS (n = 25) were prescribed behavioral management strategies (eg, physical activity, sleep, hydration, nutrition, stress management) and instructed to perform stretching/physical activity (eg, walking, stationary cycle) 30 minutes/day. VESTIB (n = 25) were prescribed precision vestibular rehabilitation exercises and instructed to perform at-home exercises for 30 minutes/day. Primary outcomes were improvement in Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening vestibular items (ie, horizontal/vertical vestibular-ocular reflex, visual motion sensitivity) at 4 weeks postenrollment.
RESULTS
We screened 310 and enrolled a total of 55 (18%) adolescent patients who were randomized to one of the interventions. Fifty of fifty-five (91%) participants completed all aspects of the study protocol. Participants in VESTIB improved significantly across the intervention period in horizontal (mean difference-1.628; 95% CI [-3.20, -0.06]; P = .04) and vertical (mean difference-2.24; 95% CI [-4.01, -0.48]; P = .01) vestibular-ocular reflex, but not visual motion sensitivity (mean difference-2.03; 95% CI [-4.26, 0.19]) of the Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening score compared with CONTROLS.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the vestibular intervention group experienced greater clinical improvements in vestibular symptoms/impairment than controls across the 4-week intervention.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03555370.
Collapse