Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34894283›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurology2022

Bilateral vestibulopathy patients' perspectives on vestibular implant treatment: a qualitative study.

Lisa van Stiphout, Florence Lucieer, Nils Guinand, Angélica Pérez Fornos, Maurice van de Berg, Vincent Van Rompaey, Josine Widdershoven, Herman Kingma, Manuela Joore, Raymond van de Berg

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Vestibular implant stimulation can improve self-motion perception.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Lisa van StiphoutDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Balance Disorders, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands. lisa.van.stiphout@mumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4981-0584
Florence LucieerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Balance Disorders, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9150-6952
Nils GuinandService of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6004-8768
Angélica Pérez FornosService of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3911-8826
Maurice van de BergDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Balance Disorders, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Vincent Van RompaeyDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0912-7780
Josine WiddershovenDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Balance Disorders, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1382-0780
Herman KingmaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Balance Disorders, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9880-8224
Manuela JooreDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment (KEMTA), Maastricht University Medical, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5649-6768
Raymond van de BergDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Balance Disorders, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9734-8668
Maastricht University · NLUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CHUniversity of Antwerp · BEMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to explore expectations of patients with bilateral vestibulopathy regarding vestibular implant treatment. This could advance the definition of recommendations for future core outcome sets of vestibular implantation and help to determine on which characteristics of bilateral vestibulopathy future vestibular implant research should focus.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 50 patients diagnosed with bilateral vestibulopathy at Maastricht UMC + . Interviews followed a semi-structured interview guide and were recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed thematically by two independent researchers. A consensus meeting took place to produce a joint interpretation for greater dimensionality and to confirm key themes.

resultsOverall, patient expectations centralized around three key themes: (physical) symptom reduction, functions and activities, and quality of life. These themes appeared to be interrelated. Patient expectations focused on the activity walking (in a straight line), reducing the symptom oscillopsia and being able to live the life they had before bilateral vestibulopathy developed. In general, patients indicated to be satisfied with small improvements.

conclusionThis study demonstrated that patient expectations regarding a vestibular implant focus on three key themes: symptom reduction, functions and activities, and quality of life. These themes closely match the functional improvements shown in recent vestibular implantation research. The results of this study provide a clear guideline from the patient perspective on which characteristics of bilateral vestibulopathy, future vestibular implant research should focus.

trial registrationNL52768.068.15/METC.

Indexed as

Bilateral VestibulopathyVestibule, LabyrinthHumansQuality of LifeVision DisordersBilateral vestibulopathyPatient expectationsQualitative studyVestibular implant

Identifiers

PMID34894283
PMCPMC9467961
OpenAlexW4200445992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.