Suppr超能文献

急诊科两种治疗良性阵发性位置性眩晕方法的比较研究

A comparative study of two methods for treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in the emergency department.

作者信息

Giardino D, Musazzi M, Perez Akly M, Cherchi M, Yacovino D A

机构信息

Department of Neurology - Dr Cesar Milstein Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Department of Neurology - Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas "Norberto Quirno" (CEMIC), Buenos Aires, Argentina.

出版信息

J Otol. 2021 Oct;16(4):231-236. doi: 10.1016/j.joto.2021.04.002. Epub 2021 May 3.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (PC-BPPV) is considered the most common cause of peripheral vertigo in the emergency department (ED). Although the canalith repositioning maneuver (CRM) is the standard of care, the most effective method to deliver it in the ED has been poorly studied.

OBJECTIVE

To compare two protocols of the Epley maneuver for the treatment of PC-BPPV.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We prospectively recruited 101 patients with unilateral PC-BPPV on physical examination, randomizing them to either a single Epley maneuver (EM) (n = 46) or multiple maneuvers (n = 55) on the same visit. Measured outcomes included presence/absence of positional nystagmus, resolution of vertigo, and score on the dizziness handicap inventory (DHI) at follow-up evaluations. The DHI was stratified into mild (≤30) and moderate-severe (>30).

RESULTS

Normalization of the Dix-Hallpike maneuver at day 5 was observed in 38% of the single EM group and 44.4% in the multiple EM group (p = 0.62). The DHI showed reduction from 42.2 (SD 18.4) to 31.9 (SD 23.7) in the single EM group and from 43.7 (SD 22.9) to 33.5 (SD 21.5) in the multiple EM group (p = 0.06). A higher number of patients improved from moderate-severe to mild DHI (p = 0.03) in the single EM group compared to the multi-EM group (p = 0.23).

CONCLUSION

There was no statistically significant difference between performing a single EM versus multiple EMs for treatment of PC-BPPV in the emergency department. The single EM approach is associated with shorter physical contact between patients and examiner, which is logically safer in a pandemic context.

摘要

引言

后半规管良性阵发性位置性眩晕(PC-BPPV)被认为是急诊科(ED)周围性眩晕最常见的病因。尽管管石复位手法(CRM)是标准治疗方法,但在急诊科实施该手法的最有效方式却鲜有研究。

目的

比较两种Epley手法方案治疗PC-BPPV的效果。

患者与方法

我们前瞻性招募了101例经体格检查确诊为单侧PC-BPPV的患者,在同一次就诊时将他们随机分为单次Epley手法组(EM)(n = 46)或多次手法组(n = 55)。测量的结果包括随访评估时位置性眼球震颤的有无、眩晕的缓解情况以及头晕残障量表(DHI)得分。DHI分为轻度(≤30)和中重度(>30)。

结果

单次EM组第5天Dix-Hallpike手法恢复正常的比例为38%,多次EM组为44.4%(p = 0.62)。DHI方面,单次EM组从42.2(标准差18.4)降至31.9(标准差23.7),多次EM组从43.7(标准差22.9)降至33.5(标准差21.5)(p = 0.06)。与多次EM组(p = 0.23)相比,单次EM组中更多患者的DHI从中重度改善为轻度(p = 0.03)。

结论

在急诊科,单次EM与多次EM治疗PC-BPPV之间无统计学显著差异。单次EM方法使患者与检查者之间的身体接触时间更短,从逻辑上讲,在大流行背景下更安全。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/de97/8438630/7a20c0813ff1/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验