Cited by 81Balance, Gait, and Falls PreventionVestibular and auditory disordersStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

Gait characteristics of patients with phobic postural vertigo: Effects of fear of falling, attention, and visual input

Schniepp, Roman, Wuehr, Max, Huth, Sabrina, Pradhan, Cauchy, Brandt, Thomas, Jahn, Klaus·2014·Journal of Neurology

Abstract

Phobic postural vertigo (PPV) is the most common cause of chronic dizziness in middle-aged patients. Many patients report symptoms involving gait. We investigated the gait performance and its relationship to the fear of falling and attention of PPV patients in a prospective study of 24 patients with PPV and 24 healthy subjects (HS) using a pressure-sensitive mat (GAITRite(®)). Subjects walked at three different speeds (slow, preferred, fast), both during cognitive dual tasks (DTc) and with eyes closed (EC). Falls efficacy and balance confidence were rated by the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I) and the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC). PPV patients walked slower, with reduced cadence (all p < 0.01), stride length (p < 0.05), and increased double support (p < 0.01) compared to HS. These changes correlated with FES-I (R = -0.528, p < 0.001) and ABC (R = 0.481, p < 0.01). Walking deterioration under DTc did not differ between PPV patients and HS, but patients showed a reduced cognitive processing speed (p < 0.05). When walking with EC, gait speed decreased more in PPV patients compared to HS (p < 0.05). Patients with PPV show gait changes which correlate with their fear of falling and balance confidence. Absent visual feedback leads to more pronounced gait deteriorations in PPV patients than in HS, indicating a higher reliance of patients on visual information during walking. These findings support the view that the gait characteristics of PPV can be attributed to an inadequate, cautious gait control.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00415-014-7259-1

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schniepp, R., Wuehr, M., Huth, S., Pradhan, C., Brandt, T., & Jahn, K.
Affiliations
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Deutsches Schwindel- und Gleichgewichtszentrum (DE)
Corresponding author
Schniepp, Roman
Venue
Journal of Neurology
Published
2014-02-12
Volume
261
Issue
4
Pages
738-746
ISSN
  • 0012-1037 (ISSN-L)
  • 0340-5354
  • 1432-1459
OpenAlex
W1995065749
Cited by
81
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4
FWCI
18.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • Federalno Ministarstvo Obrazovanja i Nauke
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Keywords
phobic postural vertigo, gait parameters, fear of falling, balance confidence, cognitive dual-task, visual input, walking speed, cadence, stride length, double support, processing speed, chronic dizziness, middle-aged patients
MeSH terms
Accidental Falls, Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Attention, Postural Balance, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Phobic Disorders, Vertigo, Vision, Ocular, Walking, Gait Disorders, Neurologic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review