Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37206911›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023

Binocular video head impulse test: Normative data study.

Maja Striteska, Martin Chovanec, Tobias Steinmetzer, Viktor Chrobok, Oliver Profant, Erich Schneider, Jan Kremlacek, Martin Valis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Maja StriteskaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Hradec Kralove, Czechia.
Martin ChovanecDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czechia.
Tobias SteinmetzerInstitute of Medical Technology, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany.
Viktor ChrobokDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Hradec Kralove, Czechia.
Oliver ProfantDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czechia.
Erich SchneiderInstitute of Medical Technology, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany.
Jan KremlacekDepartment of Medical Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Hradec Kralove, Czechia.
Martin ValisDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Prague, Czechia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The video head impulse test (vHIT) evaluates the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR). It's usually recorded from only one eye. Newer vHIT devices allow a binocular quantification of the VOR. Purpose Aim: To investigate the advantages of simultaneously recorded binocular vHIT (bvHIT) to detect the differences between the VOR gains of the adducting and the abducting eye, to define the most precise VOR measure, and to assess gaze dys/conjugacy. We aimed to establish normative values for bvHIT adducting/abducting eye VOR gains and to introduce the VOR dysconjugacy ratio (vorDR) between adducting and abducting eyes for bvHIT. Methods: We enrolled 44 healthy adult participants in a cross-sectional, prospective study using a repeated-measures design to assess test-retest reliability. A binocular EyeSeeCam Sci 2 device was used to simultaneously record bvHIT from both eyes during impulsive head stimulation in the horizontal plane. Results: Pooled bvHIT retest gains of the adducting eye significantly exceeded those of the abducting eye (mean (SD): 1.08 (SD = 0.06), 0.95 (SD = 0.06), respectively). Both adduction and abduction gains showed similar variability, suggesting comparable precision and therefore equal suitability for VOR asymmetry assessment. The pooled vorDR here introduced to bvHIT was 1.13 (SD = 0.05). The test-retest repeatability coefficient was 0.06. Conclusion: Our study provides normative values reflecting the conjugacy of eye movement responses to horizontal bvHIT in healthy participants. The results were similar to a previous study using the gold-standard scleral search coil, which also reported greater VOR gains in the adducting than in the abducting eye. In analogy to the analysis of saccade conjugacy, we propose the use of a novel bvHIT dysconjugacy ratio to assess dys/conjugacy of VOR-induced eye movements. In addition, to accurately assess VOR asymmetry, and to avoid directional gain preponderance between adduction and abduction VOR-induced eye movements leading to monocular vHIT bias, we recommend using a binocular ductional VOR asymmetry index that compares the VOR gains of only the abduction or only the adduction movements of both eyes.

Indexed as

abductionadductionbinocular video head impulse testconjugate gazeductional VOR asymmetry indexdysconjugacy ratiomonocular VOR asymmetry indexvestibuloocular reflex

Identifiers

PMID37206911
PMCPMC10188932

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.