Robby Vanspauwen | PubMed Health

PubMed2007

Vestibular function testing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides an overview of vestibular function testing and highlights the new techniques that have emerged during the past 5 years. RECENT FINDINGS: Since the introduction of video-oculography as an alternative to electro-oculography for the assessment of vestibular-induced eye movements, the investigation of the utricle has become a part of vestibular function testing, using unilateral centrifugation. Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials have become an important test for assessing saccular function, although further standardization and methodological issues remain to be clarified. Galvanic stimulation of the labyrinth also is an evolving test that may become useful diagnostically. SUMMARY: A basic vestibular function testing battery that includes ocular motor tests, caloric testing, positional testing, and earth-vertical axis rotational testing focuses on the horizontal semicircular canal. Newer methods to investigate the otolith organs are being developed. These new tests, when combined with standard testing, will provide a more comprehensive assessment of the complex vestibular organ.

Electrodiagnosis↗

PubMed2006

Improving vestibular evoked myogenic potential reliability by using a blood pressure manometer.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To improve the reliability of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (VEMP), we propose a feedback method making use of a readily available blood pressure manometer with inflatable cuff to control the sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM) contraction. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The feedback method for SCM contraction consisted of subjects pushing with their jaw against the hand-held inflated cuff to generate a specified cuff pressure. This pressure level was monitored by subject and investigator. First, we tested in a group of healthy subjects whether there was a learning or fatigue effect during four successive SCM contraction runs when making use of the feedback method. Then, we investigated the mean rectified voltage (MRV) values of the SCM. Next, we examined the hypothesis that the MRV values of the SCM contraction measured before and simultaneously with the VEMP test were equal when using this feedback method. Finally, we compared the VEMP amplitude variability in two circumstances: with and without the feedback method. RESULTS: There was no learning or fatigue effect, and the MRV values measured before the VEMP were not significantly different from those measured during the VEMP test. The VEMP amplitude variability was significantly lower when applying the feedback method than when no feedback method was used. CONCLUSION: This feedback method improves significantly the VEMP amplitude reliability.

Acoustic Stimulation↗