BACKGROUND: It has not yet been tested whether averaged gain values and the presence of pathological saccades are significantly altered by manual data selection or if data selection only done by the incorporated software detection algorithms provides a reliable data set following v-HIT testing.
OBJECTIVE: The primary endpoint was to evaluate whether the averaged gain values of all six SCCs are significantly altered by manual data selection with two different v-HIT systems.
METHOD: 120 subjects with previously neither vestibular nor neurological disorders underwent four separate tests of all six SCCs with either EyeSeeCam® or ICS Impulse®. All v-HIT test reports underwent manual data selection by an experienced ENT Specialist with deletion of any noise and/or artifacts. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare averaged gain values based on unsorted data with averaged gain values based on the sorted data.
RESULTS: EyeSeeCam®: Horizontal SCCs: The estimate and the p-value for the right lateral SCC and the left lateral SCC were 0.00004 (0.95) and 0.00087 (0.70) respectively. Vertical SCCs: The estimate varied from -0.00858 to 0.00634 with p-values ranging from 0.31 to 0.78. ICS Impulse®: Horizontal SCCs: The estimate and the p-value for the right lateral SCC and the left lateral SCC were 0.00159 (0.18) and 0.00071 (0.38) respectively. Vertical SCCs: The estimate varied from 0.00217 to 0.01357 with p-values ranging from 0.00 to 0.17. Based upon the averaged gain value from the individual SCC being tested, 148 tests before and 127 after manual data selection were considered pathological.
CONCLUSION: None of the two v-HIT systems revealed any clinically important effects of manual data selection. However, 21 fewer tests were considered pathological after manual data selection.
|Journal||Journal of Vestibular Research: Equilibrium and Orientation|
|Number of pages||13|
|Publication status||E-pub ahead of print - 5 Oct 2020|