Background Clinical practice for rehabilitation after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is variable, and guidance on when to initiate physical therapy is lacking. Wearable sensor technology may aid clinical assessment, performance monitoring, and exercise adherence, potentially improving rehabilitation outcomes during unsupervised home exercise programs. Objective The objectives of this study were to: (1) determine whether initiating rehabilitation earlier than typical will improve outcomes after mTBI, and (2) examine whether using wearable sensors during a home-exercise program will improve outcomes in participants with mTBI. Design This was a randomized controlled trial. Setting This study will take place within an academic hospital setting at Oregon Health & Science University and Veterans Affairs Portland Health Care System, and in the home environment. Participants This study will include 160 individuals with mTBI. Intervention The early intervention group (n = 80) will receive one-on-one physical therapy 8 times over 6 weeks and complete daily home exercises. The standard care group (n = 80) will complete the same intervention after a 6- to 8-week wait period. One-half of each group will receive wearable sensors for therapist monitoring of patient adherence and quality of movements during their home exercise program. Measurements The primary outcome measure will be the Dizziness Handicap Inventory score. Secondary outcome measures will include symptomatology, static and dynamic postural control, central sensorimotor integration posturography, and vestibular-ocular-motor function. Limitations Potential limitations include variable onset of care, a wide range of ages, possible low adherence and/or withdrawal from the study in the standard of care group, and low Dizziness Handicap Inventory scores effecting ceiling for change after rehabilitation. Conclusions If initiating rehabilitation earlier improves primary and secondary outcomes post-mTBI, this could help shape current clinical care guidelines for rehabilitation. Additionally, using wearable sensors to monitor performance and adherence may improve home exercise outcomes.

No abstract

Background and Purpose: Multimodal physical therapy for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) has been shown to improve recovery. Due to the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a clinical trial assessing the timing of multimodal intervention was adapted for telerehabilitation. This pilot study explored feasibility and adoption of an in-person rehabilitation program for subacute mTBI delivered through telerehabilitation. Methods: Fifty-six in-person participants—9 males; mean (SD) age 34.3 (12.2); 67 (31) days post-injury—and 17 telerehabilitation participants—8 males; age 38.3 (12.7); 61 (37) days post-injury—with subacute mTBI (between 2 and 12 weeks from injury) were enrolled. Intervention included 8, 60-minute visits over 6 weeks and included subcategories that targeted cervical spine, cardiovascular, static balance, and dynamic balance impairments. Telerehabilitation was modified to be safely performed at home with minimal equipment. Outcome measures included feasibility (the number that withdrew from the study, session attendance, home exercise program adherence, adverse events, telerehabilitation satisfaction, and progression of exercises performed), and changes in mTBI symptoms pre- and post-rehabilitation were estimated with Hedges' g effect sizes. Results: In-person and telerehabilitation had a similar study withdrawal rate (13% vs 12%), high session attendance (92% vs 97%), and no adverse events. The telerehabilitation group found the program easy to use (4.2/5), were satisfied with care (4.7/5), and thought it helped recovery (4.7/5). The telerehabilitation intervention was adapted by removing manual therapy and cardiovascular portions and decreasing dynamic balance exercises compared with the in-person group. The in-person group had a large effect size (−0.94) in decreases in symptoms following rehabilitation, while the telerehabilitation group had a moderate effect size (−0.73). Discussion and Conclusions: Telerehabilitation may be feasible for subacute mTBI. Limited ability to address cervical spine, cardiovascular, and dynamic balance domains along with underdosage of exercise progression may explain group differences in symptom resolution. Video Abstract available for more insights from the authors (see the Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, available at: http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A392).

Complaints of non-resolving imbalance are common in individuals with chronic mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Vestibular rehabilitation therapy may be beneficial for this population. Additionally, wearable sensors can enable biofeedback, specifically audio biofeedback (ABF), and aid in retraining balance control mechanisms in people with balance impairments. In this study, we described the effectiveness of vestibular rehabilitation therapy with and without ABF to improve balance in people with chronic mTBI. Participants (n = 31; females = 22; mean age = 40.9 ± 11 y) with chronic (>3 months) mTBI symptoms of self-reported imbalance were randomized into vestibular rehabilitation with ABF (n = 16) or without ABF (n = 15). The intervention was a standard vestibular rehabilitation, with or without ABF, for 45 min biweekly for 6 weeks. The ABF intervention involved a smartphone that provided auditory feedback when postural sway was outside of predetermined equilibrium parameters. Participant's completed the Post-Concussion Symptom Scale (PCSS). Balance was assessed with the sensory organization test (SOT) and the Central Sensorimotor Integration test which measured sensory weighting, motor activation, and time delay with sway evoked by surface and/or visual surround tilts. Effect sizes (Hedge's G) were calculated on the change between pre-and post-rehabilitation scores. Both groups demonstrated similar medium effect-sized decreases in PCSS and large increases in SOT composite scores after rehabilitation. Effect sizes were minimal for increasing sensory weighting for both groups. The with ABF group showed a trend of larger effect sizes in increasing motor activation (with ABF = 0.75, without ABF = 0.22) and in decreasing time delay (with ABF = −0.77, without ABF = −0.52) relative to the without ABF group. Current clinical practice focuses primarily on sensory weighting. However, the evaluation and utilization of motor activation factors in vestibular rehabilitation, potentially with ABF, may provide a more complete assessment of recovery and improve outcomes.

No abstract