METHODS: A literature search was conducted over a period of one month (April 2022).
RESULTS: 16 articles were selected based on our objective and selection criteria. A total of patients was included, with a median age of 10.9 years. 11 studies diagnosed VM based on diagnostic criteria. Caloric test and electro/videonystagmography are the most favoured investigation used (50%). Imaging was performed in 56.2% of included studies.
CONCLUSION: Deciphering the ideal diagnostic approach for VM is prudent to ensure children and adolescents suffering from VM are treated earlier. VM can be diagnosed using the established diagnostic criteria, which requires thorough and meticulous history taking. The available oto-neurological examination aims to exclude other disorders as its significance in diagnosing VM is still debatable.
AIM: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses to estimate the overall pooled prevalence of vestibular dysfunction in children and adolescents.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify studies published until 29 April 2022. We used a random-effects model to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic and Cochran's Q test. The robustness of the pooled estimates was checked by different subgroups and sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: We identified 1811 studies, of which 39 studies (n = 323,663) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the pooled prevalence of children and adolescents with VD was 30.4% [95% CI 28.5-32.3%]. The age of the participants ranged from 1 to 19 years. Participants of the included 39 studies were from 15 countries. Among the studies, 34 were cross-sectional, and five were case-control designed. There were discrepancies found in the studies with objective (higher prevalence) versus subjective (lower prevalence) evaluations.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of VD among children and adolescents was found to be 30.4% based on high-quality evidence. Due to the subjective assessment of most studies pooled in the analysis, the results should be interpreted cautiously until future comparative studies with objective assessments are carried out.
DESIGN: In this study that employed a comparative study design, 98 normally hearing adults aged between 19 and 24 years were enrolled. All of them underwent the cVEMP testing based on the recommended test protocol. The stimuli were a 500 Hz tone burst and a NB CE-Chirp (360-720 Hz) presented through insert earphones at an intensity level of 120.5 dB peSPL.
RESULTS: For each stimulus, cVEMP results did not differ significantly between the ears (p > 0.05). Relative to the 500 Hz tone burst, the NB CE-Chirp stimulus produced statistically shorter P1 and N1 latencies (p < 0.001). On the other hand, P1-N1 amplitude was found to be comparable between the two stimuli (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The present study did not find any supporting evidence that the NB CE-Chirp stimulus (centered at 500 Hz) outperformed the conventional 500 Hz tone burst in the cVEMP testing. Both stimuli are considered equally appropriate to record cVEMP responses in clinical settings.