4.3 Article

Sensory integration balance training in patients with multiple sclerosis: A randomized, controlled trial

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 21, Issue 11, Pages 1453-1462

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458514562438

Keywords

Gait disorders; quality of life; equilibrium; postural control; falls; rehabilitation

Funding

  1. Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla onlus (FISM) [FISM 2009/R/27]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Impaired sensory integration contributes to balance disorders in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Objective: The objective of this paper is to compare the effects of sensory integration balance training against conventional rehabilitation on balance disorders, the level of balance confidence perceived, quality of life, fatigue, frequency of falls, and sensory integration processing on a large sample of patients with MS. Methods: This single-blind, randomized, controlled trial involved 80 outpatients with MS (EDSS: 1.5-6.0) and subjective symptoms of balance disorders. The experimental group (n = 39) received specific training to improve central integration of afferent sensory inputs; the control group (n = 41) received conventional rehabilitation (15 treatment sessions of 50 minutes each). Before, after treatment, and at one month post-treatment, patients were evaluated by a blinded rater using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC), Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life-54, Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), number of falls and the Sensory Organization Balance Test (SOT). Results: The experimental training program produced greater improvements than the control group training on the BBS (p < 0.001), the FSS (p < 0.002), number of falls (p = 0.002) and SOT (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Specific training to improve central integration of afferent sensory inputs may ameliorate balance disorders in patients with MS. Clinical Trial Registration (NCT01040117).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available