Cost-effectiveness of internet-based vestibular rehabilitation with and without physiotherapy support for adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome in general practice

Cost-effectiveness of telehealth-delivered diet and exercise interventions: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Telehealth is a promising tool for delivering lifestyle interventions for the management of health conditions. However, limited evidence exists regarding the cost-effectiveness of these interventions. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the current literature reporting on the cost-effectiveness of telehealth-delivered diet and/or exercise interventions.

METHODS

Four electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Embase) were searched for published literature from database inception to November 2020. This review adhered to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and the ISPOR Criteria for Cost-Effectiveness Review Outcomes Checklist. The quality of reporting was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. The extracted data were grouped into subcategories according to telehealth modality, organised into tables and reported narratively.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies of controlled trials (11 combined diet and exercise, 9 exercise-only and 4 diet-only telehealth-delivered interventions) were included for data extraction and quality assessment. Interventions were reported as cost-effective in 12 studies (50%), five studies (21%) reported inconclusive results, and seven studies (29%) reported that the interventions were not cost-effective. Telephone interventions were applied in eight studies (33%), seven studies (29%) used internet interventions, six studies (25%) used a combination of internet and telephone interventions, and three studies (13%) evaluated mHealth interventions. Quality of study reporting varied with between 54% and 92% of Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards items reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that telehealth-delivered lifestyle interventions can be cost-effective compared to traditional care. There is a need for further investigations that employ rigorous methodology and economic reporting, including appropriate decision analytical models and longer timeframes.

Non-pharmacological interventions for persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD)

BACKGROUND

Persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) is a chronic balance disorder, which is characterised by subjective unsteadiness or dizziness that is worse on standing and with visual stimulation. The condition was only recently defined and therefore the prevalence is currently unknown. However, it is likely to include a considerable number of people with chronic balance problems. The symptoms can be debilitating and have a profound impact on quality of life. At present, little is known about the optimal way to treat this condition. A variety of medications may be used, as well as other treatments, such as vestibular rehabilitation.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of non-pharmacological interventions for persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD).  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 21 November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in adults with PPPD, which compared any non-pharmacological intervention with either placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies that did not use the Bárány Society criteria to diagnose PPPD, and studies that followed up participants for less than three months.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: 1) improvement in vestibular symptoms (assessed as a dichotomous outcome - improved or not improved), 2) change in vestibular symptoms (assessed as a continuous outcome, with a score on a numerical scale) and 3) serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were: 4) disease-specific health-related quality of life, 5) generic health-related quality of life and 6) other adverse effects. We considered outcomes reported at three time points: 3 to < 6 months, 6 to ≤ 12 months and > 12 months. We planned to use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: Few randomised controlled trials have been conducted to assess the efficacy of different treatments for PPPD compared to no treatment (or placebo). Of the few studies we identified, only one followed up participants for at least three months, therefore most were not eligible for inclusion in this review.  We identified one study from South Korea that compared the use of transcranial direct current stimulation to a sham procedure in 24 people with PPPD. This is a technique that involves electrical stimulation of the brain with a weak current, through electrodes that are placed onto the scalp. This study provided some information on the occurrence of adverse effects, and also on disease-specific quality of life at three months of follow-up. The other outcomes of interest in this review were not assessed. As this is a single, small study we cannot draw any meaningful conclusions from the numeric results.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Further work is necessary to determine whether any non-pharmacological interventions may be effective for the treatment of PPPD and to assess whether they are associated with any potential harms. As this is a chronic disease, future trials should follow up participants for a sufficient period of time to assess whether there is a persisting impact on the severity of the disease, rather than only observing short-term effects.

How do patients with chronic dizziness experience a web-based home rehabilitation programme for customised vestibular therapy ('WeBaVeR')? A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Vestibular rehabilitation therapy (VRT) is the first choice approach for chronic dizziness. However, current home treatment programmes often lack attention to the individual needs of the patient and the integration of visual desensitisation therapy. We therefore developed a customised web-based VRT programme containing visual desensitisation exercises.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the user experience (usability, satisfaction, acceptability, and quality) of patients with chronic dizziness with the customised WEb-BAsed VEstibular Rehabilitation, further called 'WeBaVeR'.

METHODS

Patients with chronic dizziness, attending the Department of Otorhinolaryngology of the Antwerp University Hospital (period September 2021 to May 2022), received a customised programme, i.e. exercises supported by our web application and booklet. The programme lasted 6 weeks, with weekly supervision by phone. Patients' user experience was examined with the System Usability Scale (SUS), Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ), Service User Technology Acceptability Questionnaire (SUTAQ), and the User version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS).

RESULTS

Twelve patients with chronic dizziness (mean age: 45.33 ± 13.26 years) participated. The overall rated level of perceived usability (mean SUS score: 78.75 ± 8.95 points), satisfaction (mean CSQ score: 33.08 ± 3.37 points), acceptability (mean SUTAQ score: 105.67 ± 13.40 points) and quality (mean uMARS score: 94.58 ± 10.69 points) was good. The main remarks concerned the user interface and the interactive capabilities of the web application, and that WeBaVeR does not increase health awareness, or accessibility to health care providers.

CONCLUSION

Patients with chronic dizziness consider WeBaVeR as useful, acceptable, satisfactory and of good quality. To facilitate implementation in practice, further optimisation of WeBaVeR based on the feedback received, is useful.

The Quality, Reliability, and Popularity of YouTube Education Videos for Vestibular Rehabilitation: A Cross-sectional Study

HYPOTHESIS

Vestibular rehabilitation (VR) education videos on YouTube are poor-quality and unreliable.

BACKGROUND

YouTube has become a health information source. Recent studies have determined that videos on YouTube contain misleading and inappropriate information for different medical conditions. The aim of the present study was to assess the quality and reliability of VR education videos.

METHODS

A search was performed using the keywords vertigo, vertigo treatment, vertigo exercise, and vestibular rehabilitation, on YouTube. The first 50 videos for each keyword were analyzed. Videos were divided into four groups according to the video source: Group 1: universities/occupational organizations, Group 2: medical ad/profit-oriented companies, Group 3: independent users, and Group 4: others (news/media/state institution). The quality and reliability of videos were evaluated regarding the modified DISCERN criteria, the modified Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and global quality scores (GQS).

RESULTS

Among the 200 videos analyzed, 103 were included. The main video source was medical ad/profit-oriented companies (60.2%). The mean modified DISCERN criteria score, the mean modified JAMA benchmark criteria score, and the mean GQS value of the videos were found as low (2.46 ± 1.37, 2.09 ± 1.23, and 2.67 ± 1.38, respectively). Videos uploaded by universities/occupational organizations (25.2%) had statistically significant higher modified DISCERN criteria scores, modified JAMA benchmark criteria scores, and GQS values compared with the other groups (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Online information about VR education on YouTube was of poor quality and unreliable. Expert vestibular providers should be aware of these inappropriate sources and educate patients regarding the poor-quality of videos and also aim to provide more quality and reliable sources of information.