School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Physiotherapy Department, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; SIT Health & Social Sciences Cluster, Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore.
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2019 Feb;20(2):224.e1-224.e23. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2018.11.019.
This systematic review aimed to methodically review the available evidence on poor treatment outcomes after repositioning maneuver treatments in adults with BPPV and whether there are differences in the outcomes for older and younger adults.
Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO (Ovid), Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and PubMed.
Studies were included if they were prospective experimental or observational studies with a minimal follow-up of 1 month; the subjects were at least 18 years old, had BPPV, and were treated with repositioning maneuvers. Studies were excluded if they were not available in English full text and if the outcomes used were confined to positional tests and subjective vertigo rating. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists. Meta-analysis was performed to compare outcomes for younger and older (≥60 years) subjects where multiple studies utilized similar outcomes.
Thirty-five studies were selected. The methodological quality was poor in more than 60% of the studies. Treatment efficacy, based on positional test results and symptom resolution and recurrence were the most common outcomes. Balance and quality of life measures improved after treatment but were not always normalized. Residual symptoms and psychoemotional consequences persisted in some subjects, despite BPPV resolution. Meta-analyses indicated poorer dynamic balance recovery and increased self-perceived level of handicap in the older group relative to the younger group.
Although repositioning maneuvers were effective in BPPV management, some patients experienced residual dizziness, postural instability, recurrences, and psychoemotional consequences at least 1 month after repositioning. Moreover, older adults experienced less improvements in dynamic balance and self-perceived handicap rating compared with younger people. These issues may further impact on older adults with BPPV physically and mentally and should be addressed by future better-quality research and interventions.
本系统评价旨在系统回顾成人良性阵发性位置性眩晕(BPPV)行变位复位治疗后疗效不佳的现有证据,以及老年和年轻患者的结局是否存在差异。
Embase、CINAHL、Scopus、PsycINFO(Ovid)、对照试验注册中心(CENTRAL)和 PubMed。
如果研究为前瞻性实验或观察性研究,随访时间至少 1 个月;受试者年龄至少 18 岁,患有 BPPV,并接受变位复位治疗,则纳入研究。如果研究无法提供英文全文,且使用的结局仅限于位置试验和主观眩晕评分,则排除研究。使用 Joanna Briggs 研究所循证卫生保健中心批判性评价清单评估方法学质量。对使用相似结局的多项研究进行荟萃分析,以比较年轻(<60 岁)和老年(≥60 岁)患者的结局。
共纳入 35 项研究。超过 60%的研究方法学质量较差。基于位置试验结果和症状缓解及复发,治疗效果是最常见的结局。治疗后平衡和生活质量得到改善,但并非总是正常。尽管 BPPV 已得到解决,但一些患者仍存在残留症状和心理情绪后果。荟萃分析表明,与年轻组相比,老年组动态平衡恢复较差,自我感知残疾程度增加。
尽管变位复位治疗对 BPPV 管理有效,但部分患者在变位复位后至少 1 个月仍存在残留头晕、姿势不稳、复发和心理情绪后果。此外,与年轻人相比,老年患者动态平衡和自我感知残疾评分的改善较少。这些问题可能会对 BPPV 老年患者的身心产生进一步影响,未来需要开展高质量的研究和干预措施来解决这些问题。