Abstract:

Objective　To explore the effect of virtual reality (VR) technology combined with vestibular function rehabilitation for patients with peripheral vertigo. Methods　This was a prospective study. One hundred patients with peripheral vertigo treated at Yan'an People's Hospital from January 2023 and April 2024 were divided into a single group and a combined group by envelope lottery, with 50 cases in each group. There were 29 males and 21 females in the single group; they were (52.33±6.42) years old; there were 13 cases of hypertension and 15 cases of coronary heart disease. There were 27 males and 23 females in the combined group; they were (52.28±6.47) years old; there were 16 cases of hypertension and 13 cases of coronary heart disease. The single group received vestibular function rehabilitation therapy, while the combined group received the same therapy augmented with VR technology. The clinical efficacies, improvement in vertigo symptoms, balance abilities, vestibular symptom index (VSI), and anxiety levels before and after the treatment were compared between the two groups. t and χ² tests were used for the statistical comparisons. Results　After the treatment, the clinical efficacy of the combined group was higher than that of the single group [96.0% (48/50) vs. 82.0% (41/50)]; the scores of emotional, functional, and physical domains of the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) in the combined group were lower than those in the single group (8.04±0.71 vs. 12.51±1.38, 10.85±1.11 vs. 14.12±1.53, and 9.44±0.82 vs. 13.03±1.21); the maximum oscillation length and oscillation envelope area of the combined group were lower than those of the single group [(95.72±13.08) mm vs. (121.88±15.17) mm and (425.38±53.37) mm² vs. (622.55±72.56) mm²]; the scores of dizziness, nausea, headache, balance, vertigo, and visual sensitivity of VSI in the combined group were lower than those in the single group (1.14±0.27 vs. 3.45±0.45, 1.08±0.21 vs. 3.15±0.46, 1.21±0.27 vs. 2.86±0.32, 1.22±0.27 vs. 3.41±0.40, 1.33±0.26 vs. 2.81±0.47, and 1.37±0.26 vs. 2.90±0.42); the scores of the Hamilton Anxiety Scale and Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) in the combined group were lower than those in the single group (5.85±0.62 vs. 10.63±1.04 and 6.37±0.67 vs. 11.87±1.21); there were statistical differences in the above indicators between the two groups (all P<0.05). Conclusion　VR technology combined with vestibular function rehabilitation for patients with peripheral vertigo is effective.

Key words: VR technology,  Vestibular function rehabilitation,  Peripheral vertigo,  Vestibular symptom index,  Anxiety

摘要：

目的　探讨虚拟现实（VR）技术联合前庭功能康复对周围性眩晕患者的影响。方法　采用前瞻性研究，选取2023年1月至2024年4月延安市人民医院收治的100例周围性眩晕患者，按信封抽签法随机分为单一组和联合组。单一组50例，男29例、女21例，年龄（52.33±6.42）岁，伴有高血压13例、冠心病15例。联合组50例，男27例、女23例，年龄（52.28±6.47）岁，伴有高血压16例、冠心病13例。单一组给予前庭功能康复治疗，联合组在单一组的基础上联合VR技术治疗。比较两组治疗后的临床疗效，治疗前后的眩晕改善效果、平衡能力、前庭症状指数（VSI）及焦虑程度。采用t检验、χ2检验进行统计比较。结果　治疗后，联合组的总有效率［96.0%（48/50）］高于单一组［82.0%（41/50）］；联合组眩晕障碍量表中的情感、功能、躯体评分分别为（8.04±0.71、10.85±1.11、9.44±0.82）分，均低于单一组的（12.51±1.38、14.12±1.53、13.03±1.21）分；联合组人体压力中心的最大摆动长度和摆动包络面积分别为（95.72±13.08）mm、（425.38±53.37）mm2，均低于单一组的（121.88±15.17）mm、（622.55±72.56）mm2；联合组VSI中眩晕、恶心、头痛、平衡、头晕、视觉敏感的评分分别为（1.14±0.27、1.08±0.21、1.21±0.27、1.22±0.27、1.33±0.26、1.37±0.26）分，均低于单一组的（3.45±0.45、3.15±0.46、2.86±0.32、3.41±0.40、2.81±0.47、2.90±0.42）分；联合组汉密尔顿焦虑量表、汉密尔顿抑郁量表评分分别为（5.85±0.62、6.37±0.67）分，均低于单一组的（10.63±1.04、11.87±1.21）分；以上指标两组比较，差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。结论　VR技术联合前庭功能康复在周围性眩晕患者治疗中疗效显著。

关键词: 虚拟现实技术； ,  , 前庭功能康复； ,  , 周围性眩晕； ,  , 前庭症状指数； ,  , 焦虑