| Title |
Vestibular rehabilitation in elderly patients with postural instability: reducing the number of falls—a randomized clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40520-018-1003-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marcos Rossi-Izquierdo, Pilar Gayoso-Diz, Sofía Santos-Pérez, María Del-Río-Valeiras, Ana Faraldo-García, Isabel Vaamonde-Sánchez-Andrade, Antonio Lirola-Delgado, Andrés Soto-Varela |
| Abstract |
Our previous study had shown the effectiveness of vestibular rehabilitation (VR) in improving balance in elderly patients, assessed immediately afterwards. The main goal of the present study is to consider whether this improvement in balance assessment turns out in a reduction of the number of falls. 139 elderly patients with high risk of falls were included and randomized to one of the following study arms: computerized dynamic posturography (CDP) training, optokinetic stimulus, exercises at home or control group. Patients were assessed with objective outcome measures (sensorial organization test and limits of stability of CDP, number of falls and number of hospital admissions due to falls) and subjective outcome measures (dizziness handicap inventory and short falls efficacy scale-international) during a 12-month follow-up period. Average number of falls significantly declined from 10.96 (before VR) to 3.03 (12-month follow-up) in the intervention group (p < 0.001); meanwhile, in the control group, the average number of falls changed from 3.36 to 2.61 during a 12-month follow-up period (p = 0.166). The present study provides evidence that VR can decisively improve balance in elderly patients with instability, which can lead in turn to a significant reduction of falls. We recommend performing VR in any older person with high risk of falls. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 27% |
| Spain | 2 | 18% |
| Italy | 1 | 9% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 73% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 18% |
| Scientists | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 175 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 7% |
| Researcher | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 15% |
| Unknown | 67 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 43 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 10 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 3% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 9% |
| Unknown | 78 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 June 2022.
All research outputs
#4,738,961
of 25,930,295 outputs
Outputs from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#373
of 1,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,157
of 342,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#7
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,930,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,915 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,010 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.