Department of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery and Audiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark.
Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
J Vestib Res. 2020;30(5):305-317. doi: 10.3233/VES-200717.
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.
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.
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.
EyeSeeCam®: Horizontal SCCs: The estimate and the p-value (shown in parenthesis) 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.
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.
目前尚未测试手动数据选择是否会显著改变平均增益值和病理性扫视的存在，或者仅通过包含的软件检测算法进行数据选择是否会为 v-HIT 测试后提供可靠的数据集。
主要终点是评估两种不同的 v-HIT 系统通过手动数据选择是否会显著改变所有六个 SCC 的平均增益值。
120 名受试者先前既无前庭也无神经系统疾病，分别用 EyeSeeCam®或 ICS Impulse®进行了所有六个 SCC 的四次单独测试。所有 v-HIT 测试报告均由经验丰富的耳鼻喉科专家进行手动数据选择，删除任何噪音和/或伪影。使用广义估计方程比较基于未排序数据的平均增益值和基于排序数据的平均增益值。
EyeSeeCam®：水平 SCCs：右侧 SCC 和左侧 SCC 的估计值和 p 值（括号内显示）分别为 0.00004（0.95）和 0.00087（0.70）。垂直 SCCs：估计值在-0.00858 到 0.00634 之间变化，p 值范围从 0.31 到 0.78。ICS Impulse®：水平 SCCs：右侧 SCC 和左侧 SCC 的估计值和 p 值分别为 0.00159（0.18）和 0.00071（0.38）。垂直 SCCs：估计值在 0.00217 到 0.01357 之间变化，p 值范围从 0.00 到 0.17。基于个体 SCC 的平均增益值，手动数据选择前进行了 148 次测试，选择后进行了 127 次测试，被认为是病理性的。
两种 v-HIT 系统均未显示手动数据选择有任何临床重要影响。然而，手动数据选择后，认为病理性的测试减少了 21 次。
