OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine whether the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) of the computerized dynamic posturography battery or the Clinical Test of Sensory Integration and Balance (CTSIB) is more likely to indicate balance disorders in people with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). STUDY DESIGN: Normal controls were compared to patients with unilateral BPPV of the posterior semicircular canal. METHODS: Subjects performed tests with eyes open or closed on stable and unstable surfaces, with head still or with head moving at 0.33 Hz in pitch or yaw. Dependent variables were the percent time of the standard duration each subject could perform the task, the number of head motions made, and kinematic variables measured with head- and torso-mounted inertial motion units. RESULTS: Because equilibrium scores of control subjects improved significantly over repeated trials on SOT, patients were given only one trial per condition. For percent time between-group differences were found on CTSIB with eyes closed, on foam, head moving in yaw showing significantly reduced performance by BPPV subjects compared to controls. Compared to controls, patients made significantly fewer head movements on CTSIB, eyes closed, on foam, head still, in pitch and yaw. Kinematic data also differed between the groups on tests with eyes closed and unstable surfaces with different head movement combinations, indicating increased instability in BPPV patients. CONCLUSIONS: For screening, CTSIB with head movements is more likely than SOT to indicate balance deficits, especially when dependent measures include percent time as well as head movement counts and kinematic measures.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine whether the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) of the computerized dynamic posturography battery or the Clinical Test of Sensory Integration and Balance (CTSIB) is more likely to indicate balance disorders in people with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). STUDY DESIGN: Normal controls were compared to patients with unilateral BPPV of the posterior semicircular canal. METHODS: Subjects performed tests with eyes open or closed on stable and unstable surfaces, with head still or with head moving at 0.33 Hz in pitch or yaw. Dependent variables were the percent time of the standard duration each subject could perform the task, the number of head motions made, and kinematic variables measured with head- and torso-mounted inertial motion units. RESULTS: Because equilibrium scores of control subjects improved significantly over repeated trials on SOT, patients were given only one trial per condition. For percent time between-group differences were found on CTSIB with eyes closed, on foam, head moving in yaw showing significantly reduced performance by BPPV subjects compared to controls. Compared to controls, patients made significantly fewer head movements on CTSIB, eyes closed, on foam, head still, in pitch and yaw. Kinematic data also differed between the groups on tests with eyes closed and unstable surfaces with different head movement combinations, indicating increased instability in BPPVpatients. CONCLUSIONS: For screening, CTSIB with head movements is more likely than SOT to indicate balance deficits, especially when dependent measures include percent time as well as head movement counts and kinematic measures.
Authors: William H Paloski; Scott J Wood; Alan H Feiveson; F Owen Black; Emma Y Hwang; Millard F Reschke Journal: Gait Posture Date: 2005-06-14 Impact factor: 2.840
Authors: Herman Kingma; Gérome C Gauchard; Catherine de Waele; Christian van Nechel; Alexandre Bisdorff; Alain Yelnik; Mans Magnusson; Philippe P Perrin Journal: J Vestib Res Date: 2011 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Maitreyi A Nair; Ajitkumar P Mulavara; Jacob J Bloomberg; Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar; Helen S Cohen Journal: J Vestib Res Date: 2018 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Helen S Cohen; Jasmine Stitz; Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar; Susan P Williams; Ajitkumar P Mulavara; Brian T Peters; Jacob J Bloomberg Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Helen S Cohen; Ajitkumar P Mulavara; Jasmine Stitz; Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar; Susan P Williams; Brian T Peters; Jacob J Bloomberg Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Helen S Cohen; Ajitkumar P Mulavara; Brian T Peters; Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar; Jacob J Bloomberg Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Anat V Lubetzky; Jennifer L Kelly; Bryan D Hujsak; Jenny Liu; Daphna Harel; Maura Cosetti Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Caitlin O'Connell; Mark Redfern; Kevin C Chan; Gadi Wollstein; Ian P Conner; Rakié Cham Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-10-04 Impact factor: 4.379