Usability of the head impulse test in routine clinical practice in the emergency department to differentiate vestibular neuritis from stroke

Björn Machner,Kira Erber,Jin Hee Choi,Peter Trillenberg,Andreas Sprenger,Christoph Helmchen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.14707
2021-01-15
European Journal of Neurology
Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Objective</h3><p>The bedside head impulse test (bHIT) is used to differentiate vestibular neuritis (VN) from posterior circulation stroke (PCS) in patients presenting with acute vestibular syndrome (AVS). If assessed by neuro‐otological experts, diagnostic accuracy is high. We report on its diagnostic accuracy, when applied by non‐experts during routine clinical practice in the emergency department (ED), its impact on patient management and the potential diagnostic yield of video‐oculography supported HIT (vHIT).</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>Medical chart review of 38 AVS patients presenting to our university medical center's ED, assessed by neurology residents. We collected bHIT results (abnormal/peripheral or normal/central) and whether patients were admitted to stroke unit or general neurological ward. Final diagnosis (VN, n=24; PCS, n=14) was determined by clinical course, magnetic resonance imaging and vHIT.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>The bHIT's accuracy was only 58%. Its sensitivity for VN was high (88%) but due to many false‐abnormal bHITs in PCS (36%) the specificity was low (64%). The vHIT yielded excellent specificity (100%) and moderate sensitivity (67%). The decision on patient's further care was almost arbitrary and independent from the bHIT: 58% of VN and 57% of PCS patients were admitted to the stroke unit.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusion</h3><p>The bHIT, applied by non‐experts during routine practice in the ED, has low accuracy, is too often mistaken as abnormal/peripheral and is not consistently used for patients' in‐hospital triage. As false‐abnormal bHITs can lead to misdiagnosis/‐treatment of stroke patients, we recommend that non‐expert's bHIT should be reassessed by a neuro‐otological expert or preferably quantitative vHIT in the ED.</p></section>
neurosciences,clinical neurology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?