Comparison of the Effectiveness of TRV Chair and Canalith Repositioning Procedure (CRP) for the Treatment of Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (BPPV)
The primary goal of this research is to evaluate the efficacy of
traditional manual canalith repositioning procedures (CRP) to that of automated
multi-axial repositioning chair (TRV). A total of 37 BPPV positive patients
were distributed into two groups. The first group consisted of 20 patients, 10
under 50 years old (young group) and 10 over 50 years old (old group), who
received TRV chair treatment, whereas the remaining 17 patients, 7 under 50
years old (young group) and 10 over 50 years old (old group) received CRP
treatment.The DHI and VAS questionnaires were given to the patients before and
after treatment, and the results were compared. The average VAS score for TRV
patients was 84.5% (young group) and 77.5% (old group). These patients’ DHI
results were as follows: for young patients, 10% had a mild handicap, 80% had a
moderate handicap, and 10% had a severe handicap, while for the elderly, 40%
had a mild handicap, 40% had a moderate handicap, and 20% had a severe
handicap. The results improved significantly after the first treatment session.
Old patients had a VAS of 28%, 30% had a mild handicap
and only 10% had a moderate handicap. However, only 43% of the young group and 30% of the old group who underwent standard CRP suffered from mild handicap and had
a VAS of 20% and 34.3% successively. The third session revealed that all
patients in the TRV chair group had no handicap, whereas the CRP patients
indicated that they still had a mild handicap.Upon
analyzing the results, both treatment methods revealed the same efficacy in
treating single canal BPPV. However, TRV chair appeared to be superior to traditional CRP in
treating multi-canal BPPV.
References
[1]
Jacobson, G. and Shepard, N. (2016) Balance Function Assessment and Management. 2nd Edition, Plural Publishing, San Diego.
[2]
Weber, P. (2017) Vertigo and Disequilibrium. A Practical Guide to Diagnosis and Management. 2nd Edition, Theime, New York. https://doi.org/10.1055/b-0037-144905
[3]
Gkoritsa, E. (2017) Handbook of Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo: Diagnosis and Treatment. Nova Biomedical, New York.
[4]
Richard-Vitton, T., Seidermann, L., Fraget, P., Mouillet, J., Astier, P. and Chays, A. (2005) Vertige positionnel paroxystique bénin, un fauteuil au service du diagnostic et du traitement: description et intérêt [Benign Positional Vertigo, An Armchair for Diagnosis and for Treatment: Description and Significance]. Revue de laryngologie-otologie-rhinologie, 126, 249-251.
[5]
Jacobson, G.P. and Newman, C.W. (1990) The Development of the Dizziness Handicap Inventory. Archives of Otolaryngology—Head & Neck Surgery, 116, 424-427. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1990.01870040046011
[6]
Toupet, M., Ferrary, E. and Grayeli, A.B. (2011) Visual Analog Scale to Assess Vertigo and Dizziness after Repositioning Maneuvers for Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo. Journal of Vestibular Research, 21, 235-241. https://doi.org/10.3233/VES-2011-0420
[7]
Tan, J., Yu, D., Feng, Y., Song, Q., You, J., Shi, H. and Yin, S. (2014) Comparative Study of the Efficacy of the Canalith Repositioning Procedure versus the Vertigo Treatment and Rehabilitation Chair. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 134, 704-708. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016489.2014.899711
[8]
West, N., Hansen, S., Møller, M.N., Bloch, S.L. and Klokker, M. (2016) Repositioning Chairs in Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo: Implications and Clinical Outcome. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 273, 573-580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-015-3583-z
[9]
West, N., Bloch, S.L., Møller, M.N., Hansen, S. and Klokker, M. (2019) Reposition Chair Treatment Improves Subjective Outcomes in Refractory Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo. The Journal of International Advanced Otology, 15, 146-150. https://doi.org/10.5152/iao.2019.5659
