TC04
Comparing the Effects of Whole-Body Vibration to Standard Exercise in Ambulatory People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Randomised Controlled Feasibility Study

Friday, May 29, 2015
Griffin Hall
Marcin K Uszynski, PhD , Department of Clinical Therapies, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Helen Purtill, PhD , Department of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Alan Donnelly, Professor , Physical Education & Sport Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerik, Ireland
Susan B Coote, PhD , Department of Clinical Therapies, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland



Background: Whole-body vibration (WBV) is a technology that has potential benefits in both healthy and neurological populations. It is currently unknown whether WBV is equivalent or superior to standard exercise in people with Multiple Sclerosis (PwMS).

Objectives: This study aimed firstly to investigate the feasibility of the study protocol and outcome measures, secondly to obtain data in order to inform the power calculations for a larger randomised controlled trial (RCT), and finally to investigate if whole-body vibration (WBV) is more effective than the same duration and intensity of standard exercises (EXE) in people with Multiple Sclerosis.

Methods: Twenty seven PwMS (age mean (SD) 48.1 (11.2)) with minimal gait impairments were randomly allocated to WBV (n=14) or EXE (n=13). Participants were measured before and after 12 weeks of intervention with isokinetic muscle strength, vibration threshold, Timed Up and Go test (TUG), Mini-BESTest (MBT), 6 Minute Walk test (6MWT), Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale 29 (MSIS 29), Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) and Verbal Analogue scale for sensation (VAS).

Results: WBV intervention was found feasible with low drop-out rate (11.1%) and high compliance (90%). Data suggest that a sample of 52 in each group would be sufficient to detect a moderate effect size, with 80% power and 5% significance for 6 minute walk test. Large effect sizes in favour of standard exercise were found for vibration threshold at 5thmetatarsophalangeal joint and heel (p=0.014, r= 0.5 and p=0.005, r=0.56 respectively). Although improvements were found within groups post interventions for muscle strength, balance or gait, no between group differences were found for those outcome measures (p>0.05).

Conclusions: Our data suggest that the protocol is feasible, there were no adverse effects. Future studies should be powered to detect a change in walking endurance. Although WBV is not more effective than exercise it may offer similar improvements to exercise.