ArticleThe journal of international advanced otology2024
Clinical Assessment of the Nystagmus Fixation Suppression Test: An Experimental Study.
Article in The journal of international advanced otology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessment of nystagmus fixation suppression can be used as an additional diagnostic tool for patients with an acute vestibular syndrome to distinguish between a central or peripheral cause. We investigated the ability of physicians to detect fixation suppression using a nystagmus simulation model.
methodsWe used a nystagmus simulator to measure the accuracy of the nystagmus fixation suppression test. Fixation suppression was assessed randomly in 6170 trials by 20 otorhinolaryngologists and neurologists, segregated into 2 groups based on their neurootological experience, a beginner and an experienced group. The simulator presented random nystagmus slow velocity (SPV) reductions and presented 3 conditions with either changed nystagmus frequency, amplitude, or both.
resultsThe cutoff for the discernment of fixation suppression ranged from 1.2 to 14°/s nystagmus velocity difference. The more intense the baseline nystagmus was, the more difficult was the detection of fixation suppression. There was not significant difference (P >.05) in the cutoff values in the experts group compared to the novices for all 3 different conditions. Both, novices and experts, detected frequency changes easier than differences of the nystagmus amplitude. Test sensitivity was very low (19%-65%) for discernment of small nystagmus velocity differences of <2°/s by experts.
conclusionIn our study, there was no difference between experts and novices in detection of nystagmus suppression by visual fixation. The examiners could only detect large suppression effects at low-intensity baseline nystagmus. Overall, the sensitivity and accuracy of a clinical fixation suppression test is low and the assistance with a video-oculography device is highly recommended.
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.