Cargando…
Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the reliability and accuracy of a bedside diagnostic algorithm for patients presenting with vertigo/unsteadiness to the emergency department. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive adult patients presenting with vertigo/unsteadiness at a tertiary hospital. STANDING, the acronym...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682038/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29163350 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00590 |
_version_ | 1783278027892850688 |
---|---|
author | Vanni, Simone Pecci, Rudi Edlow, Jonathan A. Nazerian, Peiman Santimone, Rossana Pepe, Giuseppe Moretti, Marco Pavellini, Andrea Caviglioli, Cosimo Casula, Claudia Bigiarini, Sofia Vannucchi, Paolo Grifoni, Stefano |
author_facet | Vanni, Simone Pecci, Rudi Edlow, Jonathan A. Nazerian, Peiman Santimone, Rossana Pepe, Giuseppe Moretti, Marco Pavellini, Andrea Caviglioli, Cosimo Casula, Claudia Bigiarini, Sofia Vannucchi, Paolo Grifoni, Stefano |
author_sort | Vanni, Simone |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: We investigated the reliability and accuracy of a bedside diagnostic algorithm for patients presenting with vertigo/unsteadiness to the emergency department. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive adult patients presenting with vertigo/unsteadiness at a tertiary hospital. STANDING, the acronym for the four-step algorithm we have previously described, based on nystagmus observation and well-known diagnostic maneuvers includes (1) the discrimination between SponTAneous and positional nystagmus, (2) the evaluation of the Nystagmus Direction, (3) the head Impulse test, and (4) the evaluation of equilibrium (staNdinG). Reliability of each step was analyzed by Fleiss’ K calculation. The reference standard (central vertigo) was a composite of brain disease including stroke, demyelinating disease, neoplasm, or other brain disease diagnosed by initial imaging or during 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-two patients were included. The incidence of central vertigo was 11.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.2–15.2%]. The leading cause was ischemic stroke (70%). The STANDING showed a good reliability (overall Fleiss K 0.83), the second step showing the highest (0.95), and the third step the lowest (0.74) agreement. The overall accuracy of the algorithm was 88% (95% CI 85–88%), showing high sensitivity (95%, 95% CI 83–99%) and specificity (87%, 95% CI 85–87%), very high-negative predictive value (99%, 95% CI 97–100%), and a positive predictive value of 48% (95% CI 41–50%) for central vertigo. CONCLUSION: Using the STANDING algorithm, non-sub-specialists achieved good reliability and high accuracy in excluding stroke and other threatening causes of vertigo/unsteadiness. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5682038 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56820382017-11-21 Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm Vanni, Simone Pecci, Rudi Edlow, Jonathan A. Nazerian, Peiman Santimone, Rossana Pepe, Giuseppe Moretti, Marco Pavellini, Andrea Caviglioli, Cosimo Casula, Claudia Bigiarini, Sofia Vannucchi, Paolo Grifoni, Stefano Front Neurol Neuroscience OBJECTIVE: We investigated the reliability and accuracy of a bedside diagnostic algorithm for patients presenting with vertigo/unsteadiness to the emergency department. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive adult patients presenting with vertigo/unsteadiness at a tertiary hospital. STANDING, the acronym for the four-step algorithm we have previously described, based on nystagmus observation and well-known diagnostic maneuvers includes (1) the discrimination between SponTAneous and positional nystagmus, (2) the evaluation of the Nystagmus Direction, (3) the head Impulse test, and (4) the evaluation of equilibrium (staNdinG). Reliability of each step was analyzed by Fleiss’ K calculation. The reference standard (central vertigo) was a composite of brain disease including stroke, demyelinating disease, neoplasm, or other brain disease diagnosed by initial imaging or during 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-two patients were included. The incidence of central vertigo was 11.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.2–15.2%]. The leading cause was ischemic stroke (70%). The STANDING showed a good reliability (overall Fleiss K 0.83), the second step showing the highest (0.95), and the third step the lowest (0.74) agreement. The overall accuracy of the algorithm was 88% (95% CI 85–88%), showing high sensitivity (95%, 95% CI 83–99%) and specificity (87%, 95% CI 85–87%), very high-negative predictive value (99%, 95% CI 97–100%), and a positive predictive value of 48% (95% CI 41–50%) for central vertigo. CONCLUSION: Using the STANDING algorithm, non-sub-specialists achieved good reliability and high accuracy in excluding stroke and other threatening causes of vertigo/unsteadiness. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5682038/ /pubmed/29163350 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00590 Text en Copyright © 2017 Vanni, Pecci, Edlow, Nazerian, Santimone, Pepe, Moretti, Pavellini, Caviglioli, Casula, Bigiarini, Vannucchi and Grifoni. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Neuroscience Vanni, Simone Pecci, Rudi Edlow, Jonathan A. Nazerian, Peiman Santimone, Rossana Pepe, Giuseppe Moretti, Marco Pavellini, Andrea Caviglioli, Cosimo Casula, Claudia Bigiarini, Sofia Vannucchi, Paolo Grifoni, Stefano Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm |
title | Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm |
title_full | Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm |
title_fullStr | Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm |
title_full_unstemmed | Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm |
title_short | Differential Diagnosis of Vertigo in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Validation Study of the STANDING Algorithm |
title_sort | differential diagnosis of vertigo in the emergency department: a prospective validation study of the standing algorithm |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682038/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29163350 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00590 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vannisimone differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT peccirudi differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT edlowjonathana differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT nazerianpeiman differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT santimonerossana differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT pepegiuseppe differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT morettimarco differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT pavelliniandrea differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT cavigliolicosimo differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT casulaclaudia differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT bigiarinisofia differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT vannucchipaolo differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm AT grifonistefano differentialdiagnosisofvertigointheemergencydepartmentaprospectivevalidationstudyofthestandingalgorithm |