↓ Skip to main content

Head-Movement-Emphasized Rehabilitation in Bilateral Vestibulopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Head-Movement-Emphasized Rehabilitation in Bilateral Vestibulopathy
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00562
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nadine Lehnen, Silvy Kellerer, Alexander G. Knorr, Cornelia Schlick, Klaus Jahn, Erich Schneider, Maria Heuberger, Cecilia Ramaioli

Abstract

Objective: Although there is evidence that vestibular rehabilitation is useful for treating chronic bilateral vestibular hypofunction (BVH), the mechanisms for improvement, and the reasons why only some patients improve are still unclear. Clinical rehabilitation results and evidence fromeye-head control in vestibular deficiency suggest that headmovement is a crucial element of vestibular rehabilitation. In this study, we assess the effects of a specifically designed head-movement-based rehabilitation program on dynamic vision, and explore underlying mechanisms. Methods: Two adult patients (patients 1 and 2) with chronic BVH underwent two 4-week interventions: (1) head-movement-emphasized rehabilitation (HME) with exercises based on active head movements, and (2) eye-movement-only rehabilitation (EMO), a control intervention with sham exercises without head movement. In a double-blind crossover design, the patients were randomized to first undergo EMO (patient 1) and-after a 4-week washout-HME, and vice-versa (patient 2). Before each intervention and after a 4-week follow-up patients' dynamic vision, vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gain, as well as re-fixation saccade behavior during passive headmotion were assessed with the head impulse testing device-functional test (HITD-FT). Results: HME, not EMO, markedly improved perception with dynamic vision during passive head motion (HITD-FT score) increasing from 0 to 60% (patient 1) and 75% (patient 2). There was a combination of enhanced VOR, as well as improved saccadic compensation. Conclusion: Head movement seems to be an important element of rehabilitation for BVH. It improves dynamic vision with a combined VOR and compensatory saccade enhancement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 18%
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 27%
Neuroscience 9 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Psychology 2 4%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 10 April 2019.
All research outputs
#3,235,357
of 24,880,704 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#2,077
of 13,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,502
of 301,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#34
of 321 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,880,704 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 301,851 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 321 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.