Assessing the synergistic effectiveness of intermittent theta burst stimulation and the vestibular ocular reflex rehabilitation protocol in the treatment of Mal de Debarquement Syndrome: a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Mal de Debarquement Syndrome (MdDS) is a rare central vestibular disorder characterised by a constant sensation of motion (rocking, swaying, bobbing), which typically arises after motion experiences (e.g. sea, air, and road travel), though can be triggered by non-motion events. The current standard of care is non-specific medications and interventions that only result in mild-to-moderate improvements. The vestibular ocular reflex (VOR) rehabilitation protocol, a specialised form of rehabilitation, has shown promising results in reducing symptoms amongst people with MdDS. Accumulating evidence suggests that it may be possible to augment the effects of VOR rehabilitation via non-invasive brain stimulation protocols, such as theta burst stimulation (TBS).

METHODS

The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of intermittent TBS (iTBS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in enhancing the effectiveness of a subsequently delivered VOR rehabilitation protocol in people with MdDS. Participants were allocated randomly to receive either Sham (n = 10) or Active (n = 10) iTBS, followed by the VOR rehabilitation protocol. Subjective outcome measures (symptom ratings and mental health scores) were collected 1 week pre-treatment and for 16 weeks post-treatment. Posturography (objective outcome) was recorded each day of the treatment week.

RESULTS

Significant improvements in subjective and objective outcomes were reported across both treatment groups over time, but no between-group differences were observed.

DISCUSSION

These findings support the effectiveness of the VOR rehabilitation protocol in reducing MdDS symptoms. Further research into iTBS is required to elucidate whether the treatment has a role in the management of MdDS. TRN: ACTRN12619001519145 (Date registered: 04 November 2019).

Do health education initiatives assist socioeconomically disadvantaged populations? A systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Health education interventions are considered critical for the prevention and management of conditions of public health concern. Although the burden of these conditions is often greatest in socio-economically disadvantaged populations, the effectiveness of interventions that target these groups is unknown. We aimed to identify and synthesize evidence of the effectiveness of health-related educational interventions in adult disadvantaged populations.

METHODS

We pre-registered the study on Open Science Framework https://osf.io/ek5yg/ . We searched Medline, Embase, Emcare, and the Cochrane Register from inception to 5/04/2022 to identify studies evaluating the effectiveness of health-related educational interventions delivered to adults in socio-economically disadvantaged populations. Our primary outcome was health related behaviour and our secondary outcome was a relevant biomarker. Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. Our synthesis strategy involved random-effects meta-analyses and vote-counting.

RESULTS

We identified 8618 unique records, 96 met our criteria for inclusion - involving more than 57,000 participants from 22 countries. All studies had high or unclear risk of bias. For our primary outcome of behaviour, meta-analyses found a standardised mean effect of education on physical activity of 0.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.09-0.19), (5 studies, n = 1330) and on cancer screening of 0.29 (95% CI = 0.05-0.52), (5 studies, n = 2388). Considerable statistical heterogeneity was present. Sixty-seven of 81 studies with behavioural outcomes had point estimates favouring the intervention (83% (95% CI = 73%-90%), p < 0.001); 21 of 28 studies with biomarker outcomes showed benefit (75% (95%CI = 56%-88%), p = 0.002). When effectiveness was determined based on conclusions in the included studies, 47% of interventions were effective on behavioural outcomes, and 27% on biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence does not demonstrate consistent, positive impacts of educational interventions on health behaviours or biomarkers in socio-economically disadvantaged populations. Continued investment in targeted approaches, coinciding with development of greater understanding of factors determining successful implementation and evaluation, are important to reduce inequalities in health.