Observational studyEar and hearing
How Good Are We in Evaluating a Bedside Head Impulse Test?
Observational study in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Assessment of the Nystagmus Fixation Suppression Test: An Experimental Study.The journal of international advanced otology · 2024Article
- A preliminary clinical study related to vestibular migraine and cognitive dysfunction.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Bilaterally positive head-impulse tests can differentiate AICA infarction from labyrinthitis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Does vestibular function correlate with objective MRI findings after vestibular schwannoma surgery?Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2023Article
- Modern vestibular tests can accurately separate stroke and vestibular neuritis.Journal of neurology · 2023Article
- Effects of saccade delay, side of deficit, and training on detection of catch-up saccades during head-impulse test in virtual-reality-enhanced mannequin.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Current concepts in acute vestibular syndrome and video-oculography.Current opinion in neurology · 2022Review
- Artificial intelligence for early stroke diagnosis in acute vestibular syndrome.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Videooculography "HINTS" in Acute Vestibular Syndrome: A Prospective Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Impaired fixation suppression of horizontal vestibular nystagmus during smooth pursuit: pathophysiology and clinical implications.European journal of neurology · 2021Article
- Quantifying a Learning Curve for Video Head Impulse Test: Pitfalls and Pearls.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesClinicians performing a horizontal head impulse test (HIT) are looking for a corrective saccade. The detection of such saccades is a challenge. The aim of this study is to assess an expert's likelihood of detecting corrective saccades in subjects with vestibular hypofunction.
designIn a prospective cohort observational study at a tertiary referral hospital, we assessed 365 horizontal HITs performed clinically by an expert neurootologist from a convenience sample of seven patients with unilateral or bilateral deficient vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR). All HITs were recorded simultaneously by video-oculography, as a gold standard. We evaluated saccades latency and amplitude, head velocity, and gain.
resultsSaccade amplitude was statistically the most significant parameter for saccade detection (p < 0.001).The probability of saccade detection was eight times higher for HIT toward the pathological side (p = 0.029). In addition, an increase in saccade amplitude resulted in an increased probability of detection (odds ratio [OR] 1.77 [1.31 to 2.40] per degree, p < 0.001). The sensitivity to detect a saccade amplitude of 1 degree was 92.9% and specificity 79%. Saccade latency and VOR gain did not significantly influence the probability of the physician identifying a saccade (OR 1.02 [0.94 to 1.11] per 10-msec latency and OR 0.84 [0.60 to 1.17] per 0.1 VOR gain increase).
conclusionsThe saccade amplitude is the most important factor for accurate saccade detection in clinically performed head impulse tests. Contrary to current knowledge, saccade latency and VOR gain play a minor role in saccade detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.