两种治疗良性阵发性位置性眩晕的方法在急诊科的比较研究

IF 1.4 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
D. Giardino , M. Musazzi , M. Perez Akly , M. Cherchi , D.A. Yacovino
{"title":"两种治疗良性阵发性位置性眩晕的方法在急诊科的比较研究","authors":"D. Giardino ,&nbsp;M. Musazzi ,&nbsp;M. Perez Akly ,&nbsp;M. Cherchi ,&nbsp;D.A. Yacovino","doi":"10.1016/j.joto.2021.04.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (PC-BPPV) is considered the most common cause of peripheral vertigo in the emergency department (ED). Although the canalith repositioning maneuver (CRM) is the standard of care, the most effective method to deliver it in the ED has been poorly studied.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare two protocols of the Epley maneuver for the treatment of PC-BPPV.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><p>We prospectively recruited 101 patients with unilateral PC-BPPV on physical examination, randomizing them to either a single Epley maneuver (EM) (n = 46) or multiple maneuvers (n = 55) on the same visit. Measured outcomes included presence/absence of positional nystagmus, resolution of vertigo, and score on the dizziness handicap inventory (DHI) at follow-up evaluations. The DHI was stratified into mild (≤30) and moderate-severe (&gt;30).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Normalization of the Dix-Hallpike maneuver at day 5 was observed in 38% of the single EM group and 44.4% in the multiple EM group (p = 0.62). The DHI showed reduction from 42.2 (SD 18.4) to 31.9 (SD 23.7) in the single EM group and from 43.7 (SD 22.9) to 33.5 (SD 21.5) in the multiple EM group (p = 0.06). A higher number of patients improved from moderate-severe to mild DHI (p = 0.03) in the single EM group compared to the multi-EM group (p = 0.23).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There was no statistically significant difference between performing a single EM versus multiple EMs for treatment of PC-BPPV in the emergency department. The single EM approach is associated with shorter physical contact between patients and examiner, which is logically safer in a pandemic context.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37466,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Otology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.joto.2021.04.002","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of two methods for treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in the emergency department\",\"authors\":\"D. Giardino ,&nbsp;M. Musazzi ,&nbsp;M. Perez Akly ,&nbsp;M. Cherchi ,&nbsp;D.A. Yacovino\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joto.2021.04.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (PC-BPPV) is considered the most common cause of peripheral vertigo in the emergency department (ED). Although the canalith repositioning maneuver (CRM) is the standard of care, the most effective method to deliver it in the ED has been poorly studied.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare two protocols of the Epley maneuver for the treatment of PC-BPPV.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><p>We prospectively recruited 101 patients with unilateral PC-BPPV on physical examination, randomizing them to either a single Epley maneuver (EM) (n = 46) or multiple maneuvers (n = 55) on the same visit. Measured outcomes included presence/absence of positional nystagmus, resolution of vertigo, and score on the dizziness handicap inventory (DHI) at follow-up evaluations. The DHI was stratified into mild (≤30) and moderate-severe (&gt;30).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Normalization of the Dix-Hallpike maneuver at day 5 was observed in 38% of the single EM group and 44.4% in the multiple EM group (p = 0.62). The DHI showed reduction from 42.2 (SD 18.4) to 31.9 (SD 23.7) in the single EM group and from 43.7 (SD 22.9) to 33.5 (SD 21.5) in the multiple EM group (p = 0.06). A higher number of patients improved from moderate-severe to mild DHI (p = 0.03) in the single EM group compared to the multi-EM group (p = 0.23).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There was no statistically significant difference between performing a single EM versus multiple EMs for treatment of PC-BPPV in the emergency department. The single EM approach is associated with shorter physical contact between patients and examiner, which is logically safer in a pandemic context.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37466,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Otology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.joto.2021.04.002\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Otology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1672293021000246\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Otology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1672293021000246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

后管良性阵发性位置性眩晕(PC-BPPV)被认为是急诊(ED)中周围性眩晕最常见的原因。虽然导管复位术(CRM)是标准的治疗方法,但在急诊科中最有效的方法研究甚少。目的比较两种Epley手法治疗PC-BPPV的疗效。患者和方法我们前瞻性地招募了101例接受体格检查的单侧PC-BPPV患者,将他们随机分为单次Epley手法(n = 46)和多次手法(n = 55)。测量结果包括存在/不存在位置性眼球震颤,眩晕的解决,以及在随访评估中头晕障碍量表(DHI)的得分。DHI分为轻度(≤30)和中重度(>30)。结果在第5天,单EM组有38%的患者恢复了正常的Dix-Hallpike动作,多EM组有44.4%的患者恢复正常(p = 0.62)。单EM组的DHI从42.2 (SD 18.4)降至31.9 (SD 23.7),多EM组从43.7 (SD 22.9)降至33.5 (SD 21.5) (p = 0.06)。与多EM组相比,单EM组从中重度DHI改善到轻度DHI的患者数量较多(p = 0.03) (p = 0.23)。结论急诊单次急诊与多次急诊治疗PC-BPPV差异无统计学意义。单一EM方法与患者和检查人员之间更短的身体接触有关,在大流行的背景下,这在逻辑上更安全。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A comparative study of two methods for treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in the emergency department

A comparative study of two methods for treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in the emergency department

Introduction

Posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (PC-BPPV) is considered the most common cause of peripheral vertigo in the emergency department (ED). Although the canalith repositioning maneuver (CRM) is the standard of care, the most effective method to deliver it in the ED has been poorly studied.

Objective

To compare two protocols of the Epley maneuver for the treatment of PC-BPPV.

Patients and methods

We prospectively recruited 101 patients with unilateral PC-BPPV on physical examination, randomizing them to either a single Epley maneuver (EM) (n = 46) or multiple maneuvers (n = 55) on the same visit. Measured outcomes included presence/absence of positional nystagmus, resolution of vertigo, and score on the dizziness handicap inventory (DHI) at follow-up evaluations. The DHI was stratified into mild (≤30) and moderate-severe (>30).

Results

Normalization of the Dix-Hallpike maneuver at day 5 was observed in 38% of the single EM group and 44.4% in the multiple EM group (p = 0.62). The DHI showed reduction from 42.2 (SD 18.4) to 31.9 (SD 23.7) in the single EM group and from 43.7 (SD 22.9) to 33.5 (SD 21.5) in the multiple EM group (p = 0.06). A higher number of patients improved from moderate-severe to mild DHI (p = 0.03) in the single EM group compared to the multi-EM group (p = 0.23).

Conclusion

There was no statistically significant difference between performing a single EM versus multiple EMs for treatment of PC-BPPV in the emergency department. The single EM approach is associated with shorter physical contact between patients and examiner, which is logically safer in a pandemic context.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Otology
Journal of Otology Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
461
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Otology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that publishes research findings from disciplines related to both clinical and basic science aspects of auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear. This journal welcomes submissions describing original experimental research that may improve our understanding of the mechanisms underlying problems of basic or clinical significance and treatment of patients with disorders of the auditory and vestibular systems. In addition to original papers the journal also offers invited review articles on current topics written by leading experts in the field. The journal is of primary importance for all scientists and practitioners interested in audiology, otology and neurotology, auditory neurosciences and related disciplines. Journal of Otology welcomes contributions from scholars in all countries and regions across the world.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信