Goggle Versus Remote-Camera Video Head Impulse Test Device Comparison.
Kristen L Janky, Jessie N Patterson, Casey Vandervelde
PMID 38965656WHAT IT FOUND
Remote-camera vHIT gave lower eye movement scores than goggles in people with vestibular dysfunction.
The normal versus abnormal classification matched except for a vertical canal.
Key findings
01In the vestibular group, horizontal canal gain was lower with the remote-camera device (.21) than with the goggle device (.35).
02In the vestibular group, vertical canal gain was lower with the remote-camera device (.27) than with the goggle device (.36).
03Despite gain differences, the devices classified normal versus abnormal identically, except for a vertical canal rated abnormal by goggles and normal by the remote camera.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only 17 control participants and 10 participants with vestibular dysfunction. Vertical canal testing was not completed for all participants; it was missing for 1 control participant and 4 participants with vestibular dysfunction. The study did not test the difficult-to-test populations it aims to support, such as infants; the reported participant age ranges started at 6 years. The remote-camera device is not FDA approved. Vestibular dysfunction was defined using the goggle device, so the comparison is anchored to one device. The remote-camera device collected fewer impulses, and the authors noted more variability in its saccade frequency.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the remote-camera device is interchangeable with goggles. It gave lower eye movement scores in people with vestibular dysfunction, and the device is not FDA approved.