Title
Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials: test-retest reliability and normative values obtained with a feedback method for the sternocleidomastoid muscle contraction Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials: test-retest reliability and normative values obtained with a feedback method for the sternocleidomastoid muscle contraction
Author
Faculty/Department
Faculty of Sciences. Physics
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Publication type
article
Publication
Amsterdam ,
Subject
Physics
Human medicine
Source (journal)
Journal of vestibular research: an international journal of experimental and clinical vestibular science. - Amsterdam
Volume/pages
19(2009) :3/4 , p. 127-135
ISSN
0957-4271
0957-4271
ISI
000278216700006
Carrier
E
Target language
English (eng)
Full text (Publishers DOI)
Affiliation
University of Antwerp
Abstract
Objective: To determine normal limits and to analyse the test-retest reliability of the vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs) parameters. Methods: The VEMP procedure was repeated on different test days to analyze test-retest differences. We calculated several reliability parameters: intraclass reliability coefficient (ICC), method error (ME), coefficient of variation of the method error (CV_{ME}), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal difference (MD) for test-retest measurements. Normal values for left-right differences, based on the interaural ratio (IAR), were determined. Results: For each VEMP parameter, the ICC values indicated excellent reliability, except for p13 and corrected amplitude (fair to good reliability). The CV_{ME} values were less than 7% for p13, n23, threshold, MRV_{females} and MRV_{males}. For the parameters corrected amplitude and raw amplitude, the CV_{ME} values exceeded 15%. The 95% IAR prediction intervals (PIs) were also largest for the parameters raw amplitude and corrected amplitude. Conclusion: In order to evaluate a VEMP outcome in a patient, the VEMP parameters and IAR values can be compared with the 95% PI of the normal values. When successive measurements are performed within the same subjects, the minimal difference (MD) serves as a tool to decide whether these differences are clinically relevant or not.
E-info
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000278216700006&DestLinkType=RelatedRecords&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000278216700006&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000278216700006&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
Handle