4.2 Article

Imbalance, motion sensitivity, anxiety and handicap in vestibular migraine and migraine only patients

Journal

AURIS NASUS LARYNX
Volume 47, Issue 5, Pages 747-751

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anl.2020.02.015

Keywords

Vestibular migraine; Balance; Anxiety; Motion sickness

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the balance ability, anxiety level and motion sickness susceptibility in Vestibular Migraine (VM) patients, migraineurs without history of vertigo (Migraine-only, MO) and healthy controls (HC). We tested the hypothesis that VM patients have worse balance performance and higher anxiety level and motion sickness than MO and HC group. Methods: This cross-sectional study included of 123 definite VM patients, 58 MO patients and 49 HCs. All subjects were evaluated with the Dynamic Gait Index (DGI), the modified Clinical Test of Sensory Integration and Balance (mCTSIB), the Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire Short-Form (MSSQ-Short), the Panic Agoraphobic Spectrum Self-Report version (PAS-SR) and the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI). Results: The main balance outcomes indicated that DGI and mCTSIB scores were worse in VM than in MO patients and worse in MO patients than in HCs. Almost 50% of the VM patients fell in the most challenging mCTSIB conditions compared with 20% of MO patients and none of the HCs. VM patients had more marked motion sickness susceptibility, higher anxiety and DHI scores than MO patients and HCs. VM patients who fell had higher DHI and anxiety scores than those who did not. Conclusion: Balance problems, motion sickness, anxiety, and disability are more marked in VM patients than in MO patients and more marked in MO patients than in HCs. Focused treatments of these problems which could help VM patients need further study. (C) 2020 Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Society of Japan Inc. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available