Dizziness: neurological emergencies

Clinical Practice Guideline: Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (Update)

Objective

This update of a 2008 guideline from the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation provides evidence-based recommendations to benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), defined as a disorder of the inner ear characterized by repeated episodes of positional vertigo. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer advocate added to the update group; new evidence from 2 clinical practice guidelines, 20 systematic reviews, and 27 randomized controlled trials; enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making; a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships; and new and expanded recommendations for the diagnosis and management of BPPV.

Purpose

The primary purposes of this guideline are to improve the quality of care and outcomes for BPPV by improving the accurate and efficient diagnosis of BPPV, reducing the inappropriate use of vestibular suppressant medications, decreasing the inappropriate use of ancillary testing such as radiographic imaging, and increasing the use of appropriate therapeutic repositioning maneuvers. The guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with BPPV, and it applies to any setting in which BPPV would be identified, monitored, or managed. The target patient for the guideline is aged ≥18 years with a suspected or potential diagnosis of BPPV. The primary outcome considered in this guideline is the resolution of the symptoms associated with BPPV. Secondary outcomes considered include an increased rate of accurate diagnoses of BPPV, a more efficient return to regular activities and work, decreased use of inappropriate medications and unnecessary diagnostic tests, reduction in recurrence of BPPV, and reduction in adverse events associated with undiagnosed or untreated BPPV. Other outcomes considered include minimizing costs in the diagnosis and treatment of BPPV, minimizing potentially unnecessary return physician visits, and maximizing the health-related quality of life of individuals afflicted with BPPV.

Action Statements

The update group made strong recommendations that clinicians should (1) diagnose posterior semicircular canal BPPV when vertigo associated with torsional, upbeating nystagmus is provoked by the Dix-Hallpike maneuver, performed by bringing the patient from an upright to supine position with the head turned 45° to one side and neck extended 20° with the affected ear down, and (2) treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, patients with posterior canal BPPV with a canalith repositioning procedure. The update group made a strong recommendation against postprocedural postural restrictions after canalith repositioning procedure for posterior canal BPPV. The update group made recommendations that the clinician should (1) perform, or refer to a clinician who can perform, a supine roll test to assess for lateral semicircular canal BPPV if the patient has a history compatible with BPPV and the Dix-Hallpike test exhibits horizontal or no nystagmus; (2) differentiate, or refer to a clinician who can differentiate, BPPV from other causes of imbalance, dizziness, and vertigo; (3) assess patients with BPPV for factors that modify management, including impaired mobility or balance, central nervous system disorders, a lack of home support, and/or increased risk for falling; (4) reassess patients within 1 month after an initial period of observation or treatment to document resolution or persistence of symptoms; (5) evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, patients with persistent symptoms for unresolved BPPV and/or underlying peripheral vestibular or central nervous system disorders; and (6) educate patients regarding the impact of BPPV on their safety, the potential for disease recurrence, and the importance of follow-up. The update group made recommendations against (1) radiographic imaging for a patient who meets diagnostic criteria for BPPV in the absence of additional signs and/or symptoms inconsistent with BPPV that warrant imaging, (2) vestibular testing for a patient who meets diagnostic criteria for BPPV in the absence of additional vestibular signs and/or symptoms inconsistent with BPPV that warrant testing, and (3) routinely treating BPPV with vestibular suppressant medications such as antihistamines and/or benzodiazepines. The guideline update group provided the options that clinicians may offer (1) observation with follow-up as initial management for patients with BPPV and (2) vestibular rehabilitation, either self-administered or with a clinician, in the treatment of BPPV.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo

Objectives:

This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on managing benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), which is the most common vestibular disorder in adults, with a lifetime prevalence of 2.4 percent. The guideline targets patients aged 18 years or older with a potential diagnosis of BPPV, evaluated in any setting in which an adult with BPPV would be identified, monitored, or managed. This guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage adults with BPPV.

Purpose:

The primary purposes of this guideline are to improve quality of care and outcomes for BPPV by improving the accurate and efficient diagnosis of BPPV, reducing the inappropriate use of vestibular suppressant medications, decreasing the inappropriate use of ancillary tests such as radiographic imaging and vestibular testing, and to promote the use of effective repositioning maneuvers for treatment. In creating this guideline, the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of audiology, chiropractic medicine, emergency medicine, family medicine, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, neurology, nursing, otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, physical therapy, and physical medicine and rehabilitation.

Results

The panel made strong recommendations that 1) clinicians should diagnose posterior semicircular canal BPPV when vertigo associated with nystagmus is provoked by the Dix-Hallpike maneuver. The panel made recommendations against 1) radiographic imaging, vestibular testing, or both in patients diagnosed with BPPV, unless the diagnosis is uncertain or there are additional symptoms or signs unrelated to BPPV that warrant testing; and 2) routinely treating BPPV with vestibular suppressant medications such as antihistamines or benzodiazepines. The panel made recommendations that 1) if the patient has a history compatible with BPPV and the Dix-Hallpike test is negative, clinicians should perform a supine roll test to assess for lateral semicircular canal BPPV; 2) clinicians should differentiate BPPV from other causes of imbalance, dizziness, and vertigo; 3) clinicians should question patients with BPPV for factors that modify management including impaired mobility or balance, CNS disorders, lack of home support, and increased risk for falling; 4) clinicians should treat patients with posterior canal BPPV with a particle repositioning maneuver (PRM); 5) clinicians should reassess patients within 1 month after an initial period of observation or treatment to confirm symptom resolution; 6) clinicians should evaluate patients with BPPV who are initial treatment failures for persistent BPPV or underlying peripheral vestibular or CNS disorders; and 7) clinicians should counsel patients regarding the impact of BPPV on their safety, the potential for disease recurrence, and the importance of follow-up. The panel offered as options that 1) clinicians may offer vestibular rehabilitation, either self-administered or with a clinician, for the initial treatment of BPPV and 2) clinicians may offer observation as initial management for patients with BPPV and with assurance of follow-up. The panel made no recommendation concerning audiometric testing in patients diagnosed with BPPV.

Disclaimer:

This clinical practice guideline is not intended as a sole source of guidance in managing benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making strategies. The guideline is not intended to replace clinical judgement or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition, and may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem. ® 2008 American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation. All rights reserved.

Overreliance on symptom quality in diagnosing dizziness: results of a multicenter survey of emergency physicians

OBJECTIVE

To assess emergency physicians' diagnostic approach to the patient with dizziness, using a multicenter quantitative survey.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

We anonymously surveyed attending and resident emergency physicians at 17 academic-affiliated emergency departments with an Internet-based survey (September 1, 2006, to November 3, 2006). The survey respondents ranked the relative importance of symptom quality, timing, triggers, and associated symptoms and indicated their agreement with 20 statements about diagnostic assessment of dizziness (Likert scale). We used logistic regression to assess the impact of "symptom quality ranked first" on odds of agreement with diagnostic statements; we then stratified responses by academic rank.

RESULTS

Of the 505 individuals surveyed, 415 responded for an overall response rate of 82%. A total of 93% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90%-95%) agreed that determining type of dizziness is very important, and 64% (95% CI, 60%-69%) ranked symptom quality as the most important diagnostic feature. In a multivariate model, those ranking quality first (particularly resident physicians) more often reported high-risk reasoning that might predispose patients to misdiagnosis (eg, in a patient with persistent, continuous dizziness, who could have a cerebellar stroke, resident physicians reported feeling reassured that a normal head computed tomogram indicates that the patient can safely go home) (odds ratio, 6.74; 95% CI, 2.05-22.19).

CONCLUSION

Physicians report taking a quality-of-symptoms approach to the diagnosis of dizziness in patients in the emergency department. Those relying heavily on this approach may be predisposed to high-risk downstream diagnostic reasoning. Other clinical features (eg, timing, triggers, associated symptoms) appear relatively undervalued. Educational initiatives merit consideration.

Imprecision in patient reports of dizziness symptom quality: a cross-sectional study conducted in an acute care setting

OBJECTIVE

To quantify precision in patient reports of different attributes of dizziness.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, we interviewed consecutive adult patients with dizziness at 2 urban academic emergency departments (EDs) from July 2, 2005, to August 26, 2005. We excluded patients who were too sick for an interview or who posed a risk to the interviewer. We included those who were "dizzy, light-headed, or off-balance" for 7 days or less or previously "bothered" by the same conditions. We assessed descriptions of dizziness quality elicited by 4 questions in different formats (open-ended, multiresponse, single-choice, and directed). Clarity was assessed qualitatively (vague, circular) and quantitatively (overlap of types of dizziness). Consistency was measured by frequency of mismatched responses across question formats. Reliability was determined by test-retest.

RESULTS

Of 1,342 patients screened, 872 (65%) were dizzy, light-headed, or off-balance in the past 7 days (n=677) or previously bothered by dizziness (n=195). Among these 872 patients with dizziness, 44% considered dizziness "the main reason" or "part of the reason" for the ED visit. Open-ended descriptions were frequently vague or circular. A total of 62% selected more than 1 dizziness type on the multiresponse question. On the same question, 54% did not pick 1 or more types endorsed previously in open description. Of 218 patients not identifying vertigo, spinning, or motion on the first 3 questions, 70% confirmed "spinning or motion" on directed questioning. Asked to choose the single best descriptor, 52% picked a different response on retest approximately 6 minutes later. By comparison, reports of dizziness duration and triggers were clear, consistent, and reliable.

CONCLUSION

Descriptions of the quality of dizziness are unclear, inconsistent, and unreliable, casting doubt on the validity of the traditional approach to the patient with dizziness. Alternative approaches, emphasizing timing and triggers over type, should be investigated.