Cited by 127Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlVestibular and auditory disorders

Efficacy of tilt training in the treatment of neurally mediated syncope. A randomized study

Open access
Foglia-Manzillo, G·2004·Europace

Abstract

Recurrent neurally mediated syncope represents a common clinical event and a therapeutic challenge. Recently tilt training has been proposed for the treatment of recurrent neurally mediated syncope. To evaluate the efficacy of tilt training in preventing tilt-induced syncope and its feasibility, this controlled, randomized study was undertaken. Sixty-eight consenting patients (25 males and 43 females, mean age 40 +/- 19) with recurrent neurally mediated syncope and 2 consecutive positive nitroglycerin-potentiated head-up tilt tests were randomized to tilt training (35 patients) or no treatment (controls, 33 patients). The tilt training programme consisted of daily 30-min sessions of upright standing against a vertical wall 6 days a week for at least 3 weeks, until a reevaluation tilt test (3 patients of both groups dropped out). On this third head-up tilt test, 19 (59%) of 32 tilt trained patients and 18 (60%) of 30 controls still had a positive test. Treated patients performed a mean number of 15 +/- 7 sessions (median 16) and only 11 patients (34%) did all the programmed sessions. Only 1 patient (3%) discontinued treatment because of intolerance, while all other patients did not perform tilt training adequately, because of poor compliance. Thus, in our study tilt training was not effective in reducing tilt testing positivity rate in patients with neurally mediated syncope. Because of poor compliance, tilt training appears to be a feasible treatment only for highly motivated patients, but not for the majority of patients with recurrent neurally mediated syncope.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eupc.2004.01.002

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 18 · Cited by 127

Authors
Foglia-Manzillo, G.
Affiliations
Ospedale Valduce (IT)
Corresponding author
Foglia-Manzillo, G
Venue
Europace
Published
2004-05
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
199-204
ISSN
1099-5129 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104109433
Cited by
127
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 9
FWCI
6.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EP Europace (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
Keywords
neurally mediated syncope, tilt training, recurrent syncope, head-up tilt, treatment efficacy, medication adherence
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Pressure, Feasibility Studies, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Posture, Prospective Studies, Treatment Failure, Tilt-Table Test, Syncope, Vasovagal, Secondary Prevention

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