The Conventional Head Impulse Test Versus the Suppression Head Impulse Test: A Clinical Comparative Study.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Mayada Elsherif
{"title":"The Conventional Head Impulse Test Versus the Suppression Head Impulse Test: A Clinical Comparative Study.","authors":"Mayada Elsherif","doi":"10.5152/iao.2023.22860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The suppression head impulse test is a new paradigm of the head impulse test, recently introduced for clinical use. The aim of this study was to assess the importance of the suppression head impulse paradigm in evaluating vestibular function.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This comparative study was conducted from June 2020 to June 2022. The ears of the participants were divided into 2 groups: (i) ears with vestibular weakness and (ii) healthy controls. All participants underwent video head impulse tests at the time of presentation with both conventional head impulse paradigm and suppression head impulse paradigm, performed by the same examiner. The results of the 2 tests were compared, and the correlation between the corresponding parameters obtained (vestibulo-ocular reflex gain and saccades) was examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-five participants were included in the study (190 ears) with a mean age of 42.2 ± 12.6 years. Forty-six ears had vestibular weakness, and 144 were healthy controls. The suppression head impulse paradigm test showed a significantly lower vestibulo-ocular reflex gain than the head impulse paradigm in both groups. A positive correlation emerged between the vestibulo-ocular reflex gain measured with both paradigms. Regarding the saccades, a negative correlation was observed between the overt saccades latency and amplitude measured with both paradigms.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The new suppression head impulse paradigm complements the head impulse paradigm for a better evaluation of the vestibular function. The inconsistency of covert saccades in suppression head impulse paradigm makes it superior to head impulse paradigm in measuring vestibulo-ocular reflex gain, especially in patients with vestibular loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":54793,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Advanced Otology","volume":"19 1","pages":"41-44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b3/c8/jiao-19-1-41.PMC9985065.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Advanced Otology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/iao.2023.22860","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The suppression head impulse test is a new paradigm of the head impulse test, recently introduced for clinical use. The aim of this study was to assess the importance of the suppression head impulse paradigm in evaluating vestibular function.

Methods: This comparative study was conducted from June 2020 to June 2022. The ears of the participants were divided into 2 groups: (i) ears with vestibular weakness and (ii) healthy controls. All participants underwent video head impulse tests at the time of presentation with both conventional head impulse paradigm and suppression head impulse paradigm, performed by the same examiner. The results of the 2 tests were compared, and the correlation between the corresponding parameters obtained (vestibulo-ocular reflex gain and saccades) was examined.

Results: Ninety-five participants were included in the study (190 ears) with a mean age of 42.2 ± 12.6 years. Forty-six ears had vestibular weakness, and 144 were healthy controls. The suppression head impulse paradigm test showed a significantly lower vestibulo-ocular reflex gain than the head impulse paradigm in both groups. A positive correlation emerged between the vestibulo-ocular reflex gain measured with both paradigms. Regarding the saccades, a negative correlation was observed between the overt saccades latency and amplitude measured with both paradigms.

Conclusion: The new suppression head impulse paradigm complements the head impulse paradigm for a better evaluation of the vestibular function. The inconsistency of covert saccades in suppression head impulse paradigm makes it superior to head impulse paradigm in measuring vestibulo-ocular reflex gain, especially in patients with vestibular loss.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

常规脑脉冲试验与抑制脑脉冲试验:临床比较研究。
背景:抑制头脉冲试验是头脉冲试验的一种新模式,最近才被引入临床应用。本研究的目的是评估抑制头脉冲范式在评估前庭功能中的重要性。方法:对比研究时间为2020年6月至2022年6月。参与者的耳朵分为两组:(i)前庭功能虚弱的耳朵和(ii)健康对照组。所有参与者在陈述时都接受了由同一考官进行的常规头部冲动范式和抑制头部冲动范式的视频头部冲动测试。比较两种实验的结果,并检验相应参数(前庭-眼反射增益与扫视)之间的相关性。结果:95名受试者(190耳)被纳入研究,平均年龄42.2±12.6岁。46只耳朵有前庭神经衰弱,144只是健康对照。抑制头冲动范式测试显示两组的前庭-眼反射增益显著低于头冲动范式。两种方法测得的前庭-眼反射增益呈正相关。在扫视方面,两种范式测量的显性扫视潜伏期与幅度呈负相关。结论:新的抑制头冲动范式是头冲动范式的补充,能更好地评价前庭功能。抑制头冲动模式下隐蔽扫视的不一致性使其在测量前庭-眼反射增益方面优于头冲动模式,特别是在前庭功能丧失的患者中。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of International Advanced Otology (IAO – Citation Abbreviation: J Int Adv Otol) is an open access double-blind peer-reviewed, international publication. The Journal of International Advanced Otology is fully sponsored and owned by the European Academy of Otology and Neurotology and the Politzer Society. The Journal of International Advanced Otology is published 3 times per year on April, August, December and its publication language is English. The scope of the Journal is limited with otology, neurotology, audiology (excluding linguistics) and skull base medicine. The Journal of International Advanced Otology aims to publish manuscripts at the highest clinical and scientific level. IAO publishes original articles in the form of clinical and basic research, review articles, short reports and a limited number of case reports. Controversial patient discussions, communications on emerging technology, and historical issues will also be considered for publication.
×
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
小红书