Miles Byworth1, Peter Johns2, Alim Pardhan3, Kavita Srivastava4, Mike Sharma5. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Neurology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. miles.byworth@medportal.ca. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 3. Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine and Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 5. Department of Medicine, McMaster University, and Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The HINTS examination (head impulse, nystagmus, test of skew) is a bedside physical examination technique that can distinguish between vertigo due to stroke, and more benign peripheral vestibulopathies. Uptake of this examination is low among Emergency Medicine (EM) physicians; therefore, we surveyed Canadian EM physicians to determine when the HINTS exam is employed, and what factors account for its low uptake. METHODS: We designed and tested a 26-question online survey, and disseminated it via email to EM physicians registered with the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), with 3 and 5-week reminder emails to increase completion. This anonymous survey had no incentives for participation, and was completed by 185 EM physicians, with post-graduate medical training in either Emergency Medicine or Family Medicine. The primary outcomes were the frequencies of various responses to survey questions, with secondary outcomes being the associations between participant characteristics and given responses. RESULTS: 88 respondents (47.8%) consistently use the HINTS examination in the work-up of vertigo, and 117 (63.7%) employ it in scenarios where its clinical utility is limited. The latter is more common among physicians working in non-academic settings, without 5-year EM residency training, and with greater years of practice (p < 0.01). The most frequent explanations for non-use were a lack of need for the HINTS examination, the lack of validation of the exam among EM physicians, and concerns surrounding the head-impulse test. CONCLUSIONS: Though HINTS exam usage is common, there is a need for education on when to apply it, and how to do so, particularly as concerns the head-impulse test. Our attached rubric may assist with this, but quality-improvement initiatives are warranted. Low uptake is partly due to the lack of validation of this examination among EM physicians, so effort should be made to conduct well-designed HINTS trials exclusively involving EM physicians.
OBJECTIVES: The HINTS examination (head impulse, nystagmus, test of skew) is a bedside physical examination technique that can distinguish between vertigo due to stroke, and more benign peripheral vestibulopathies. Uptake of this examination is low among Emergency Medicine (EM) physicians; therefore, we surveyed Canadian EM physicians to determine when the HINTS exam is employed, and what factors account for its low uptake. METHODS: We designed and tested a 26-question online survey, and disseminated it via email to EM physicians registered with the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), with 3 and 5-week reminder emails to increase completion. This anonymous survey had no incentives for participation, and was completed by 185 EM physicians, with post-graduate medical training in either Emergency Medicine or Family Medicine. The primary outcomes were the frequencies of various responses to survey questions, with secondary outcomes being the associations between participant characteristics and given responses. RESULTS: 88 respondents (47.8%) consistently use the HINTS examination in the work-up of vertigo, and 117 (63.7%) employ it in scenarios where its clinical utility is limited. The latter is more common among physicians working in non-academic settings, without 5-year EM residency training, and with greater years of practice (p < 0.01). The most frequent explanations for non-use were a lack of need for the HINTS examination, the lack of validation of the exam among EM physicians, and concerns surrounding the head-impulse test. CONCLUSIONS: Though HINTS exam usage is common, there is a need for education on when to apply it, and how to do so, particularly as concerns the head-impulse test. Our attached rubric may assist with this, but quality-improvement initiatives are warranted. Low uptake is partly due to the lack of validation of this examination among EM physicians, so effort should be made to conduct well-designed HINTS trials exclusively involving EM physicians.
Authors: Ángel Batuecas-Caletrío; Raquel Yáñez-González; Carmen Sánchez-Blanco; Enrique González-Sánchez; José Benito; José Carlos Gómez; Santiago Santa Cruz-Ruiz Journal: Rev Neurol Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 0.870
Authors: C Oppenheim; R Stanescu; D Dormont; S Crozier; B Marro; Y Samson; G Rancurel; C Marsault Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S Vanni; R Pecci; C Casati; F Moroni; M Risso; M Ottaviani; P Nazerian; S Grifoni; P Vannucchi Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 2.124