A Randomized, Double Blind, Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Electrical Vestibular Nerve Stimulation (VeNS), Compared to a Sham Control for Generalized Anxiety Disorder

<b>Aims and Objectives:</b> It has been hypothesised that vestibular stimulation may have a modulatory effect on anxiety. The aim of this randomised, double blind, sham-controlled trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of a non-invasive electrical vestibular nerve stimulation (VeNS) device as a treatment for anxiety compared to a sham stimulation device. <b>Materials and methods:</b> A total of 60 participants (mean age [SD]: 35.6 [8.1]) with a generalized anxiety disorder assessment (GAD-7) score of ≥10 were randomised to receive either an active VeNS device (n = 34) or a sham control device (n = 26). Both groups were asked to complete 20 stimulation sessions (30 min duration) at a rate of 3-5 sessions per week at a research clinic. The primary outcome was change in GAD-7 score from baseline to the end of study (when each participant finished their 20 stimulation sessions). Secondary outcomes were change in Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) scores (8 domains). <b>Results:</b> One participant allocated to the sham group withdrew from the study. The mean (SD) number of weeks it took to complete the 20 stimulation sessions was 5.8. The active group had a statistically greater reduction in GAD-7 score compared to the sham group (-7.4 versus -2.2, <i>P </i>< .001; respectively). A total of 97% (n = 33) of the active group achieved a clinically meaningful reduction (defined as ≥4-point reduction) in GAD-7 from baseline to the follow up visit compared to 24% (n = 6) of the sham group (<i>P </i>< .001). Additionally, the active group showed a significant improvement in ISI (-4.9 versus 2.2, <i>P </i>< .001) and greater improvements on all eight SF36 domains (<i>P </i>< .001) compared with the sham group. There was no device related reported adverse events. <b>Conclusion:</b> Regular non-invasive electrical vestibular nerve stimulation appears to have a clinically meaningful benefit when used as an intervention for Generalized Anxiety Disorder.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical EEG and Neuroscience
Published
2025-03-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/15500594251328080
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Randomized, Double Blind, Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Electrical Vestibular Nerve Stimulation (VeNS), Compared to a Sham Control for Generalized Anxiety Disorder

Jason McKeown, Rachel Robinson, Ramesh Raghavan, Wiktoria Ratajczak et al.
4 citations
Clinical EEG and Neuroscience
Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
5.88
article

A Randomized, Double Blind, Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Electrical Vestibular Nerve Stimulation (VeNS), Compared to a Sham Control for Generalized Anxiety Disorder

Jason McKeown, Rachel Robinson, Ramesh Raghavan, Wiktoria Ratajczak, Rohit Singh Chouhan, Shirin Macias, Sinead Watson, Sai Sailesh Kumar Goothy
article en
4 citations

Abstract

<b>Aims and Objectives:</b> It has been hypothesised that vestibular stimulation may have a modulatory effect on anxiety. The aim of this randomised, double blind, sham-controlled trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of a non-invasive electrical vestibular nerve stimulation (VeNS) device as a treatment for anxiety compared to a sham stimulation device. <b>Materials and methods:</b> A total of 60 participants (mean age [SD]: 35.6 [8.1]) with a generalized anxiety disorder assessment (GAD-7) score of ≥10 were randomised to receive either an active VeNS device (n = 34) or a sham control device (n = 26). Both groups were asked to complete 20 stimulation sessions (30 min duration) at a rate of 3-5 sessions per week at a research clinic. The primary outcome was change in GAD-7 score from baseline to the end of study (when each participant finished their 20 stimulation sessions). Secondary outcomes were change in Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) scores (8 domains). <b>Results:</b> One participant allocated to the sham group withdrew from the study. The mean (SD) number of weeks it took to complete the 20 stimulation sessions was 5.8. The active group had a statistically greater reduction in GAD-7 score compared to the sham group (-7.4 versus -2.2, <i>P </i>< .001; respectively). A total of 97% (n = 33) of the active group achieved a clinically meaningful reduction (defined as ≥4-point reduction) in GAD-7 from baseline to the follow up visit compared to 24% (n = 6) of the sham group (<i>P </i>< .001). Additionally, the active group showed a significant improvement in ISI (-4.9 versus 2.2, <i>P </i>< .001) and greater improvements on all eight SF36 domains (<i>P </i>< .001) compared with the sham group. There was no device related reported adverse events. <b>Conclusion:</b> Regular non-invasive electrical vestibular nerve stimulation appears to have a clinically meaningful benefit when used as an intervention for Generalized Anxiety Disorder.

Clinical EEG and NeuroscienceVol. 57(2)
Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences (IN), Saveetha University (IN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
5.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.