Liang Y F, Zhang S Q, Zeng X L, Cen J T, Li Z C, Yuan T, Fang B X, Gu J
Department of Otolaryngology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University,Guangzhou,501630,China.
Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2018 Aug 5;32(15):1130-1133. doi: 10.13201/j.issn.1001-1781.2018.15.002.
To explore the equivalence of the test results of the water or air caloric tests and the compliance of the test in the healthy individuals. To provide scientific basis for clinical standardization of caloric test. Randomized crossover clinical trial, 60 healthy individuals were divided into group A and group B. Water caloric test was carried out first in group A, and air caloric test was carried out after elution effect(one day interval). The treatment of group B was opposite to group A. SPV(Slow Phase Velocity), CP(canal paralysis) and SPV and CP' s 95% were used as evaluation indexes to analyze the equivalence of water and air caloric test in healthy people and the clinical normal reference value and stability and compliance of the water and air caloric test. ①60 cases of caloric test CP value of chi square test suggested that there was no statistical difference between two kinds of media in the examination of the vestibular function of healthy individuals, and the CP value of the two was 85%(51/60). ②the SPV value of the was obviously higher than that of the air caloric test. The SPV value at each temperature of the water caloric test stimulation is quite different from the air caloric test stimulation. ③The range of water caloric test stimulation CP 95%CI was 8%-12%, and the average value was 10%. The interval of air caloric test stimulation CP 95%CI was 10%-15% and the average value was 12%. ④This study provided the corresponding SPV 95% as the medical reference values. ⑤The subjects of 98.33%(59/60) of the questionnaire survey selecting air caloric test and the results of the observation indicated that the duration of the air caloric test was shorter and more comfortable. ①Air caloric test can satisfied the needs of clinical assessment of horizontal semicircular canal function, and can make patients feel more comfortable. However, due to the weak intensity of nystagmus, water caloric test has to be used when the SPV value is too low. ②In this study, the upper limit of the CP value of the air caloric test in healthy individuals was 0.21, which is quite different from the upper limit of the standard value was 0.25 of the water caloric test. Therefore, the laboratory should establish their own reference value of the laboratory caloric test, and should not blindly apply the standard value of the water caloric test as the standard of the hemiplegia of the unilateral semicircular canal. The results of this study suggest that air caloric test can be used instead of water caloric test in clinic. And if the patient has no contraindications, air caloric test can be used as a priority.
探讨水或空气冷热试验检测结果的等效性及该试验在健康个体中的依从性，为冷热试验临床标准化提供科学依据。随机交叉临床试验，将60例健康个体分为A组和B组。A组先进行水冷热试验，洗脱效应后（间隔1天）进行空气冷热试验。B组处理与A组相反。采用慢相速度（SPV）、半规管麻痹（CP）及SPV和CP的95%可信区间作为评价指标，分析水和空气冷热试验在健康人群中的等效性及水和空气冷热试验的临床正常参考值、稳定性和依从性。①60例冷热试验CP值的卡方检验表明，两种介质在健康个体前庭功能检查中无统计学差异，两者CP值均为85%（51/60）。②水冷热试验的SPV值明显高于空气冷热试验。水冷热试验刺激各温度下的SPV值与空气冷热试验刺激差异较大。③水冷热试验刺激CP 95%可信区间范围为8% - 12%，平均值为10%。空气冷热试验刺激CP 95%可信区间为10% - 15%，平均值为12%。④本研究给出了相应的SPV 95%作为医学参考值。⑤问卷调查中98.33%（59/60）的受试者选择空气冷热试验，观察结果表明空气冷热试验持续时间较短且更舒适。①空气冷热试验能满足水平半规管功能临床评估需求，且能使患者感觉更舒适。但因眼震强度较弱，当SPV值过低时仍需使用水冷热试验。②本研究中健康个体空气冷热试验CP值上限为0.21，与水冷热试验标准值上限0.25差异较大。因此，实验室应建立自身的冷热试验参考值，不应盲目将水冷热试验标准值作为单侧半规管偏瘫的标准。本研究结果提示，临床可用空气冷热试验替代水冷热试验，且在患者无禁忌证时，可优先采用空气冷热试验。
