Goggle Versus Remote-Camera Video Head Impulse Test Device Comparison.

IF 2.6 2区医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY

Ear and Hearing Pub Date : 2024-07-05 DOI:10.1097/AUD.0000000000001547

Kristen L Janky, Jessie N Patterson, Casey Vandervelde

{"title":"Goggle Versus Remote-Camera Video Head Impulse Test Device Comparison.","authors":"Kristen L Janky, Jessie N Patterson, Casey Vandervelde","doi":"10.1097/AUD.0000000000001547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: This study compared remote versus goggle video head impulse testing (vHIT) outcomes to validate remote-camera vHIT, which is gaining popularity in difficult to test populations.Design: Seventeen controls and 10 individuals with vestibular dysfunction participated. Each participant completed remote-camera and goggle vHIT. The main outcome parameters were canal gain, frequency of corrective saccades, and a normal versus abnormal rating.Results: Horizontal and vertical canal vHIT gain was significantly lower in the vestibular compared with the control group; remote-camera gains were significantly lower compared with goggle gain for the vestibular group only. The devices categorized control versus vestibular canals identically except for one vertical canal. In the vestibular group, there was not a significant difference in the percentage of compensatory saccades between devices.Conclusion: These data provide validation that results obtained with a remote-camera device are similar to those obtained using a standard goggle device.","PeriodicalId":55172,"journal":{"name":"Ear and Hearing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ear and Hearing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000001547","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study compared remote versus goggle video head impulse testing (vHIT) outcomes to validate remote-camera vHIT, which is gaining popularity in difficult to test populations.

Design: Seventeen controls and 10 individuals with vestibular dysfunction participated. Each participant completed remote-camera and goggle vHIT. The main outcome parameters were canal gain, frequency of corrective saccades, and a normal versus abnormal rating.

Results: Horizontal and vertical canal vHIT gain was significantly lower in the vestibular compared with the control group; remote-camera gains were significantly lower compared with goggle gain for the vestibular group only. The devices categorized control versus vestibular canals identically except for one vertical canal. In the vestibular group, there was not a significant difference in the percentage of compensatory saccades between devices.

Conclusion: These data provide validation that results obtained with a remote-camera device are similar to those obtained using a standard goggle device.

查看原文本刊更多论文

护目镜与遥控摄像机视频头脉冲测试设备比较。

研究目的本研究比较了遥控和目镜视频头脉冲测试（vHIT）的结果，以验证遥控摄像机vHIT的有效性，这种方法在难以测试的人群中越来越受欢迎：设计：17 名对照组和 10 名前庭功能障碍患者参加了这项研究。设计：17 名对照组和 10 名前庭功能障碍患者参加了测试，每位参与者都完成了遥控摄像机和护目镜 vHIT 测试。主要结果参数包括管增益、矫正性囊回视频率以及正常与异常评级：结果：与对照组相比，前庭组的水平和垂直管vHIT增益明显较低；与目镜增益相比，仅前庭组的遥控摄像机增益明显较低。除一个垂直管道外，这些设备对对照组和前庭组管道的分类完全相同。在前庭组中，不同设备的补偿性囊视百分比差异不大：这些数据验证了使用遥控相机设备获得的结果与使用标准目镜设备获得的结果相似。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Ear and Hearing 医学-耳鼻喉科学

CiteScore

5.90

自引率

10.80%

发文量

207

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： From the basic science of hearing and balance disorders to auditory electrophysiology to amplification and the psychological factors of hearing loss, Ear and Hearing covers all aspects of auditory and vestibular disorders. This multidisciplinary journal consolidates the various factors that contribute to identification, remediation, and audiologic and vestibular rehabilitation. It is the one journal that serves the diverse interest of all members of this professional community -- otologists, audiologists, educators, and to those involved in the design, manufacture, and distribution of amplification systems. The original articles published in the journal focus on assessment, diagnosis, and management of auditory and vestibular disorders.