As health care providers we like to say that we provide evidence based treatment, but what is the evidence for the vestibular therapy we provide? Specifically, how about the treatment we provide for vestibular hypofunction?
With being a busy clinician it can be a bit daunting trying to keep up with the latest research. We also have to realize that for every good piece of research there is research that is, well, not so good. So, how do we filter out the clinically relevant and strong evidence based research?
Fortunately, from time to time clinical practice guidelines come out and provide direction. Over the past few years there have been clinical practice guidelines developed for common conditions like BPPV and sports related concussion. The Barany Institute has also provided some great resources in the field of vestibular therapy.
Recently, associates from Key Clinical Skills forwarded us a copy of the Vestibular Rehabilitation For Peripheral Hypofunction: An Updated Clinical Practice Guideline (Dec 2021) which was awesome. Given that we have been treating the dizzy population for years we often wonder if our treatment approach is still up to date with the best evidence out there.
Although we recommend reading through the entire article, below is a summary for quick reference which will cover:
According to the guidelines, a unilateral vestibular hypofunction (UVH) is a partial or complete loss of function of one of the peripheral vestibular sensory organs and/or vestibular nerves. Acute UVH is most commonly due to a vestibular neuritis, but may also be due to:
Research indicates that spontaneous rebalancing of the resting firing rate of the tonic vestibular system results in reduction of the nystagmus and symptoms usually within 14 days. Now this does not mean that patients will be fully recovered in 14 days. Rather they will be feeling a lot better when not moving within the first 14 days.
Bilateral vestibular hypofunction (BVH) , on the other hand, is a partial or complete loss of function of both peripheral vestibular sensory organs and/or vestibular nerves. Causes for BVH include, but are not limited to:
Worth noting is that 20-51% of the time the cause of a BVH is unknown.
With the guidelines, a peripheral vestibular loss in the research reviewed was determined by laboratory testing of calorics, rotary chair, or video head impulse testing (vHIT). While clinically, we may not have these tests accessible there are several bedside clinical tests that can help us rule in a vestibular hypofunction. These tests include looking for spontaneous & gaze evoked nystagmus, using the head shaking nystagmus test, head thrust test (aka head impulse test), and static vs dynamic visual acuity testing.
The updated guidelines can be summarized with the 11 action statements that are as follows:
A 4 minute video summary from several of the authors of the guidelines can also be found at: https://links.lww.com/JNPT/A369
For the sake of these guidelines:
Acute refers to the first 2 weeks after the onset of symptoms.
Subacute refers to after the acute stage to 3 months following the onset of symptoms.
Chronic refers to symptoms persisting past 3 months.
When reading through the guidelines there are two main things to consider. One is the action statement itself and the other, the strength of the action statement. The following tables will help you determine the strength of the action statements.
GRADE | RECOMMENDATION | STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE |
A | Strong evidence | A preponderance of level I and/or level II studies support the recommendation. This must include at least 1 level I study directly on the topic that supports the recommendation. Recommendation obligation: “should” or “should not.” |
B | Moderate evidence | A single high-quality randomized controlled study or a preponderance of level II studies support the recommendation. Recommendation obligation: “may” or “may not.” |
C | Weak evidence | A single level II study or the preponderance of level III and IV studies support the recommendation. Recommendation obligation: “may” or “may not.” |
D | Expert opinion | Best practice based on the clinical experience of the guideline development team and guided by evidence, which may be conflicting. Recomendation obligation: “may consider.” |
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE |
|
I | Evidence obtained from high-quality (over 50% critical appraisal score and >80% follow-up, blinding, and appropriate randomization) randomized controlled trials. |
II | Evidence obtained from high-quality cohort (>80% follow-up) study or lesser quality (<50% critical appraisal score or the study does not meet requirements for high quality) randomized controlled trials. |
III | Evidence obtained from case-controlled study, lower-quality cohort study, or retrospective study. |
IV | Evidence obtained from case series |
V | Expert opinion. |
check out the full article.
It is great to have groups such as the Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy perform a literature review and provide guidelines. Looking through the guidelines we can be reassured of what we are doing well along with things we can tweak a bit to provide even better care.
These guidelines are also great to determine the direction of further research so we can continue to improve our understanding of peripheral vestibular hypofunction and how to best address it.
Looking forward to the update planned for 2026 and appreciate these current guidelines.
Further updates to the guidelines can be found at www.neuropt.org.
50% Complete
Simply fill out the below and click on "Subscribe".