ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2024
Galvanic vestibular stimulation for the postural rehabilitation of HTLV-1-associated myelopathy.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) is a simple, safe, and noninvasive method of neurostimulation that can be used to improve body balance. Several central nervous system diseases cause alterations in body balance, including HTLV-1-associated myelopathy (HAM). Objective: To test GVS as a balance rehabilitation strategy for HAM. Methods: This study is a quasi-experimental clinical trial in which postural balance was compared before and after a GVS rehabilitation protocol applied to 20 patients with HAM, 12 women and 8 men, average age of 78 and 79 years, respectively. They were followed for nine months after the end of the GVS protocol, which consisted of one GVS session per week for 12 consecutive weeks. The GVS current intensity was progressively increased from 1.0 milliamperes (mA) to 3.5 mA until the third session and maintained at 3.5 mA until the 12th session. The electrical stimulation time progressively increased from 9 min in the first session to 18 min in the second session and maintained at 30 min from the third session onwards. Postural balance was assessed by Time up and go test (TUG), Berg balance scale (BBS) and posturography that were performed before the beginning of the intervention, during the intervention (6th week), at the end of the intervention (12th week) and after 9 months of follow-up without electrical stimulation. Results: In a blind comparison, in the 12th week of stimulation, improvement was observed in all the tests. In TUG, time in seconds changed from 28 before to 18 after GVS ( Conclusion: GVS was an effective method to improve postural instability of patients with HAM in the short term, but the gain in postural stability was not maintained in the long term. A device for home use may be an option for long-term use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.