Examining Sociodemographic Differences in the Management of Vestibular Neuritis and Labyrinthitis by Ear, Nose, and Throat Providers and Vestibular Rehabilitation Outcomes.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Shweta Lodha, Avivah J Wang, Kristal M Riska
{"title":"Examining Sociodemographic Differences in the Management of Vestibular Neuritis and Labyrinthitis by Ear, Nose, and Throat Providers and Vestibular Rehabilitation Outcomes.","authors":"Shweta Lodha, Avivah J Wang, Kristal M Riska","doi":"10.1044/2025_AJA-24-00265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to determine the most common management strategies for vestibular neuritis and labyrinthitis (VNL) by ear, nose, and throat (ENT) providers and identify sociodemographic variations in vestibular rehabilitation therapy (VRT) referral rates and VNL patient performance on baseline VRT assessments.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A retrospective study of all adult patients with a single diagnosis of VNL who visited a multiprovider tertiary ENT clinic (<i>n</i> = 168) was conducted. Demographic information, treatment recommendations, and baseline vestibular rehabilitation performance information were extracted from ENT clinical notes and initial VRT notes. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were performed to evaluate sociodemographic differences, and <i>p</i> ≤ .003 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>VRT was the most popular treatment recommendation made by ENT providers, and VRT referral rates did not vary according to sociodemographic factors. 68.8% of referred patients initiated VRT. The number of patients with abnormal baseline VRT assessments did not differ by sex or race. More public insurance holders had abnormal Dynamic Gait Index assessment scores (<i>p</i> = .001) and gait speeds than did private insurance holders (<i>p</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>VRT was the most frequent clinical management strategy recommended to VNL patients by ENT providers, and referral rates did not vary by sex, race, or insurance status. Most VRT patients had vestibular dysfunction on baseline assessments, suggesting appropriate referral of VRT by ENT. VNL patients' baseline vestibular function did not vary by sex or race but did vary by insurance status. Further work is needed to investigate study generalizability and elucidate the impact of insurance type on fall risk.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.30053206.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_AJA-24-00265","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to determine the most common management strategies for vestibular neuritis and labyrinthitis (VNL) by ear, nose, and throat (ENT) providers and identify sociodemographic variations in vestibular rehabilitation therapy (VRT) referral rates and VNL patient performance on baseline VRT assessments.

Method: A retrospective study of all adult patients with a single diagnosis of VNL who visited a multiprovider tertiary ENT clinic (n = 168) was conducted. Demographic information, treatment recommendations, and baseline vestibular rehabilitation performance information were extracted from ENT clinical notes and initial VRT notes. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were performed to evaluate sociodemographic differences, and p ≤ .003 was considered statistically significant.

Results: VRT was the most popular treatment recommendation made by ENT providers, and VRT referral rates did not vary according to sociodemographic factors. 68.8% of referred patients initiated VRT. The number of patients with abnormal baseline VRT assessments did not differ by sex or race. More public insurance holders had abnormal Dynamic Gait Index assessment scores (p = .001) and gait speeds than did private insurance holders (p < .001).

Conclusions: VRT was the most frequent clinical management strategy recommended to VNL patients by ENT providers, and referral rates did not vary by sex, race, or insurance status. Most VRT patients had vestibular dysfunction on baseline assessments, suggesting appropriate referral of VRT by ENT. VNL patients' baseline vestibular function did not vary by sex or race but did vary by insurance status. Further work is needed to investigate study generalizability and elucidate the impact of insurance type on fall risk.

Supplemental material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.30053206.

耳鼻喉科医师治疗前庭神经炎和迷路炎的社会人口学差异及前庭康复结果
目的:本研究旨在确定耳鼻喉科(ENT)医生对前庭神经炎和迷路炎(VNL)最常见的治疗策略,并确定前庭康复治疗(VRT)转诊率和VNL患者在基线VRT评估中的表现的社会人口统计学差异。方法:回顾性研究了所有在多提供者三级耳鼻喉科就诊的成年VNL患者(n = 168)。从耳鼻喉科临床记录和初始VRT记录中提取人口统计信息、治疗建议和基线前庭康复表现信息。采用卡方检验和Fisher精确检验来评估社会人口统计学差异,p≤0.003被认为具有统计学意义。结果:VRT是耳鼻喉科医生最流行的治疗建议,VRT转诊率不受社会人口因素的影响。68.8%的转诊患者开始了VRT。基线VRT评估异常的患者数量没有性别或种族差异。公共参保人动态步态指数评估得分(p = .001)和步态速度异常多于私人参保人(p < .001)。结论:VRT是耳鼻喉科医生向VNL患者推荐的最常见的临床管理策略,转诊率不因性别、种族或保险状况而变化。大多数VRT患者在基线评估中有前庭功能障碍,提示耳鼻喉科适当转诊VRT。VNL患者的基线前庭功能不因性别或种族而异,但因保险状况而异。进一步的工作需要调查研究的普遍性,并阐明保险类型对跌倒风险的影响。补充资料:https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.30053206。
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
American Journal of Audiology
American Journal of Audiology AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
163
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Mission: AJA publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to clinical audiology methods and issues, and serves as an outlet for discussion of related professional and educational issues and ideas. The journal is an international outlet for research on clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, management and outcomes of hearing and balance disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. The clinical orientation of the journal allows for the publication of reports on audiology as implemented nationally and internationally, including novel clinical procedures, approaches, and cases. AJA seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of clinical audiology, including audiologic/aural rehabilitation; balance and balance disorders; cultural and linguistic diversity; detection, diagnosis, prevention, habilitation, rehabilitation, and monitoring of hearing loss; hearing aids, cochlear implants, and hearing-assistive technology; hearing disorders; lifespan perspectives on auditory function; speech perception; and tinnitus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信