| Related Articles |
Test-retest reliability of binaural simultaneous cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential recording.
J Vestib Res. 2015 Oct 15;25(3,4):151-160
Authors: Lee MY, Yi YJ, Park H, Kim MH, Lee JH, Oh SH, Suh MW
Abstract
AIMS: The purpose of this study is to compare the test-retest reliability of cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP) parameters between monaural sequential (mSEQ) cVEMP and binaural simultaneous (bSIM) cVEMP recordings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty two volunteers aged 22 from 38 years were enrolled. Two different methods of cVEMP measurement were performed in the subjects. The two methods were (1) monaural sequential (mSEQ) measurement and (2) binaural simultaneous (bSIM) measurement. After a mean test-retest interval of 7.1 ± 2.8 days, the second run of the cVEMP measurement was performed in a random order. To compare the test-retest reliability of mSEQ and bSIM cVEMP responses, Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Spearman correlation were applied.
RESULTS: Both p13 and n23 latencies did not show a statistically significant difference between the two cVEMP recording methods. Also, there were no significant differences in the inter-peak amplitude (IPA) and interaural amplitude difference (IAD) ratio between the two methods. The test-retest reliability of inter-peak amplitude (IPA) demonstrated a positive correlation for both mSEQ and bSIM cVEMP methods. The IAD ratio of bSIM cVEMP response demonstrated a statistically significant test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.691, p= 0.015). However, the IAD ratio of mSEQ cVEMP response did not demonstrate a statistically significant test-retest correlation.
CONCLUSION: Results implicate that bSIM cVEMP not only saves time, but it also has an advantage of a more reliable test-retest outcome.
PMID: 26756130 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
from #ENT-PubMed via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/230wRW2
via IFTTT
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου