These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials: test-retest reliability and normative values obtained with a feedback method for the sternocleidomastoid muscle contraction.
    Author: Vanspauwen R, Wuyts FL, Van de Heyning PH.
    Journal: J Vestib Res; 2009; 19(3-4):127-35. PubMed ID: 20448338.
    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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]