Impact of dizziness on everyday life in older primary care patients: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dizziness is a common and often disabling symptom, but diagnosis often remains unclear; especially in older persons where dizziness tends to be multicausal. Research on dizziness-related impairment might provide options for a functional oriented approach, with less focus on finding diagnoses. We therefore studied dizziness-related impairment in older primary care patients and aimed to identify indicators related to this impairment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a cross-sectional study we included 417 consecutive patients of 65 years and older presenting with dizziness to 45 general practitioners in the Netherlands from July 2006 to January 2008. We performed tests, including patient history, and physical and additional examination, previously selected by an international expert panel and based on an earlier systematic review. Our primary outcome was impact of dizziness on everyday life measured with the Dutch validated version of the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI). After a bootstrap procedure (1500x) we investigated predictability of DHI-scores with stepwise backward multiple linear and logistic regressions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>DHI-scores varied from 0 to 88 (maximum score: 100) and 60% of patients experienced moderate or severe impact on everyday life due to dizziness. Indicators for dizziness-related impairment were: onset of dizziness 6 months ago or more (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.7-4.7), frequency of dizziness at least daily (OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.0-5.4), duration of dizziness episode one minute or less (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.5-3.9), presence of anxiety and/or depressive disorder (OR 4.4, 95% CI 2.2-8.8), use of sedative drugs (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3-3.8) , and impaired functional mobility (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.7-4.2). For this model with only 6 indicators the AUC was .80 (95% CI .76-.84).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Dizziness-related impairment in older primary care patients is considerable (60%). With six simple indicators it is possible to identify which patients suffer the most from their dizziness without exactly knowing the cause(s) of their dizziness. Influencing these indicators, if possible, may lead to functional improvement and this might be effective in patients with moderate or severe impact of dizziness on their daily lives.</p

Prognosis and Survival of Older Patients With Dizziness in Primary Care:a 10-year prospective cohort study

Purpose: The prognosis of dizzy older patients in primary care is unknown. Our objective was to determine the prognosis and survival of patients with different subtypes and causes of dizziness. Methods: In a primary care prospective cohort study, 417 older adults with dizziness (mean age 75.5 years) received a full diagnostic workup in 2006-2008. A panel of physicians classified their dizziness subtype and primary cause of dizziness. Presyncope was the most common dizziness subtype (69.1%), followed by vertigo (41.0%), disequilibrium (39.8%), and other dizziness (1.7%). The most common primary causes of dizziness were cardiovascular disease (56.8%) and peripheral vestibular disease (14.4%). Main outcome measures were mortality and dizziness-related impairment assessed at 10-year follow-up.Results: At 10-year follow-up 169 patients (40.5%) had died. Multivariable adjusted Cox models showed a lower mortality rate for patients with the subtype vertigo compared to other subtypes (HR 0.62 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.96)), and for peripheral vestibular disease versus cardiovascular disease as primary cause of dizziness (HR 0.46 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.84)). After 10 years, 47.7% of patients who filled out the follow-up measurement experienced substantial dizziness-related impairment. No significant difference in substantial impairment was seen between different subtypes and primary causes of dizziness. Conclusions: The 10-year mortality rate was lower for the dizziness subtype vertigo compared to other subtypes. Patients with dizziness primarily caused by peripheral vestibular disease had a lower mortality rate than patients with cardiovascular disease. Substantial dizziness-related impairment in older dizzy patients 10 years later is high, and indicates that current treatment strategies by FPs may be suboptimal.<br/

Health economic evaluation of a nurse-assisted online eye screening in home healthcare to reduce avoidable vision impairment (iScreen):study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background: Among older people undiagnosed and untreated vision impairment and blindness are common. The leading causes are uncorrected refractive errors and cataracts. Vision problems are associated with a lower quality of life, several health problems, and a higher chance of falling accidents and fractures. To eliminate avoidable vision impairment and blindness, targeted eye screening programs are recommended. Older patients, receiving home healthcare, have not yet been considered as a population at risk who could benefit from eye screening. Methods: A cluster-randomized controlled trial will be conducted to investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of online nurse-assisted eye screening in home healthcare, compared to care as usual, in reducing avoidable vision impairment. A healthcare and societal perspective will be used. The study will be performed in collaboration with several home healthcare organizations in the Netherlands. The online eye screening consists of near and distance visual acuity, followed by an Amsler grading test. Measurements in both groups will take place at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of follow-up. A total of 240 participants will be recruited. Older men and women (65 +), who receive home-based nursing and are cognitively able to participate, will be included. The primary outcome will be the change of two lines or more on the Colenbrander-1 M visual acuity chart between baseline and 12-month follow-up. Discussion: An eye screening for populations at risk contributes to the detection of undiagnosed and untreated vision impairment. This may reduce the health-related consequences of vision loss and the high economic burden associated with vision impairment. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06058637. Registered on 27 September 2023.</p

Internet based vestibular rehabilitation with and without physiotherapy support for adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome in general practice:three armed randomised controlled trial

Objective: To investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of stand alone and blended internet based vestibular rehabilitation (VR) in the management of chronic vestibular syndromes in general practice.Design: Pragmatic, three armed, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial.Setting: 59 general practices in the Netherlands.Participants: 322 adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome.Interventions: Stand alone VR comprising a six week, internet based intervention with weekly online sessions and daily exercises (10-20 minutes a day). In the blended VR group, the same internet based intervention was supplemented by face-to-face physiotherapy support (home visits in weeks 1 and 3). Participants in the usual care group received standard care from a general practitioner, without any restrictions.Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was vestibular symptoms after six months as measured by the vertigo symptom scale-short form (VSS-SF range 0-60, clinically relevant difference ≥3 points). Secondary outcomes were dizziness related impairment, anxiety, depressive symptoms, subjective improvement of vestibular symptoms after three and six months, and adverse events.Results: In the intention-to-treat analysis, participants in the stand alone and blended VR groups had lower VSS-SF scores at six months than participants in the usual care group (adjusted mean difference −4.1 points, 95% confidence interval −5.8 to −2.5; and −3.5 points, −5.1 to −1.9, respectively). Similar differences in VSS-SF scores were seen at three months follow-up. Participants in the stand alone and blended VR groups also experienced less dizziness related impairment, less anxiety, and more subjective improvement of vestibular symptoms at three and six months. No serious adverse events related to online VR occurred during the trial.Conclusion: Stand alone and blended internet based VR are clinically effective and safe interventions to treat adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome. Online VR is an easily accessible form of treatment, with the potential to improve care for an undertreated group of patients in general practice.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR5712

Internet based vestibular rehabilitation with and without physiotherapy support for adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome in general practice:three armed randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of stand alone and blended internet based vestibular rehabilitation (VR) in the management of chronic vestibular syndromes in general practice. DESIGN: Pragmatic, three armed, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 59 general practices in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 322 adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: Stand alone VR comprising a six week, internet based intervention with weekly online sessions and daily exercises (10-20 minutes a day). In the blended VR group, the same internet based intervention was supplemented by face-to-face physiotherapy support (home visits in weeks 1 and 3). Participants in the usual care group received standard care from a general practitioner, without any restrictions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was vestibular symptoms after six months as measured by the vertigo symptom scale-short form (VSS-SF range 0-60, clinically relevant difference ≥3 points). Secondary outcomes were dizziness related impairment, anxiety, depressive symptoms, subjective improvement of vestibular symptoms after three and six months, and adverse events. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, participants in the stand alone and blended VR groups had lower VSS-SF scores at six months than participants in the usual care group (adjusted mean difference -4.1 points, 95% confidence interval -5.8 to -2.5; and -3.5 points, -5.1 to -1.9, respectively). Similar differences in VSS-SF scores were seen at three months follow-up. Participants in the stand alone and blended VR groups also experienced less dizziness related impairment, less anxiety, and more subjective improvement of vestibular symptoms at three and six months. No serious adverse events related to online VR occurred during the trial. CONCLUSION: Stand alone and blended internet based VR are clinically effective and safe interventions to treat adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome. Online VR is an easily accessible form of treatment, with the potential to improve care for an undertreated group of patients in general practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR5712

Predictors of dizziness in older persons: a 10-year prospective cohort study in the community

BACKGROUND: The current diagnosis-oriented approach of dizziness does not suit older patients. Often, it is difficult to identify a single underlying cause, and when a diagnosis is made, therapeutic options may be limited. Identification of predictors of dizziness may provide new leads for the management of dizziness in older patients. The aim of the present study was to investigate long-term predictors of regular dizziness in older persons. METHODS: Population-based cohort study of 1,379 community-dwelling participants, aged ≥60 years, from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA). Regular dizziness was ascertained during face-to-face medical interviews during 7- and 10-year follow-up. We investigated 26 predictors at baseline from six domains: socio-demographic, medical history, medication, psychological, sensory, and balance/gait. We performed multivariate logistic regression analyses with presence of regular dizziness at 7- and 10-year follow-up as dependent variables. We assessed the performance of the models by calculating calibration and discrimination. RESULTS: Predictors of regular dizziness at 7-year follow-up were living alone, history of dizziness, history of osteo/rheumatoid arthritis, use of nitrates, presence of anxiety or depression, impaired vision, and impaired function of lower extremities. Predictors of regular dizziness at 10-year follow-up were history of dizziness and impaired function of lower extremities. Both models showed good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow P value of 0.36 and 0.31, respectively) and acceptable discrimination (adjusted AUC after bootstrapping of 0.77 and 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: Dizziness in older age was predicted by multiple factors. A multifactorial approach, targeting potentially modifiable predictors (e.g., physical exercise for impaired function of lower extremities), may add to the current diagnosis-oriented approach. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2318-14-133) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Profiling Dizziness in Older Primary Care Patients: An Empirical Study

The diagnostic approach to dizzy, older patients is not straightforward as many organ systems can be involved and evidence for diagnostic strategies is lacking. A first differentiation in diagnostic subtypes or profiles may guide the diagnostic process of dizziness and can serve as a classification system in future research. In the literature this has been done, but based on pathophysiological reasoning only

Health economic evaluation of a nurse-assisted online eye screening in home healthcare to reduce avoidable vision impairment (iScreen): study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background: Among older people undiagnosed and untreated vision impairment and blindness are common. The leading causes are uncorrected refractive errors and cataracts. Vision problems are associated with a lower quality of life, several health problems, and a higher chance of falling accidents and fractures. To eliminate avoidable vision impairment and blindness, targeted eye screening programs are recommended. Older patients, receiving home healthcare, have not yet been considered as a population at risk who could benefit from eye screening. Methods: A cluster-randomized controlled trial will be conducted to investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of online nurse-assisted eye screening in home healthcare, compared to care as usual, in reducing avoidable vision impairment. A healthcare and societal perspective will be used. The study will be performed in collaboration with several home healthcare organizations in the Netherlands. The online eye screening consists of near and distance visual acuity, followed by an Amsler grading test. Measurements in both groups will take place at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of follow-up. A total of 240 participants will be recruited. Older men and women (65 +), who receive home-based nursing and are cognitively able to participate, will be included. The primary outcome will be the change of two lines or more on the Colenbrander-1 M visual acuity chart between baseline and 12-month follow-up. Discussion: An eye screening for populations at risk contributes to the detection of undiagnosed and untreated vision impairment. This may reduce the health-related consequences of vision loss and the high economic burden associated with vision impairment. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06058637. Registered on 27 September 2023

The evaluation of an online nurse-assisted eye-screening tool in older adults receiving home healthcare

PURPOSE: To investigate the agreement between an online nurse-assisted eye-screening tool and reference tests in older adults receiving home healthcare and to collect user experiences. METHODS: Older adults (65+) receiving home healthcare were included. Home healthcare nurses assisted in administering the eye-screening tool at participants' homes. Approximately 2 weeks later, a researcher administered reference tests at participants' homes. Experiences from participants and home healthcare nurses were collected. Agreement in outcomes (distance and near visual acuity, with the latter being measured using two different optotypes, and macular problems) between the eye-screening tool and reference clinical testing was compared. A difference of less than ±0.15 logMAR was considered acceptable. RESULTS: A total of 40 participants were included. Here, we describe the results for the right eye; results for the left eye were similar. The mean difference between the eye-screening tool and reference tests for distance visual acuity was 0.02 logMAR. The mean difference between the eye-screening tool and reference tests using two different optotypes for near visual acuity was 0.06 and 0.03 logMAR, respectively. The majority of the individual data points were within the ±0.15 logMAR threshold (75%, 51% and 58%, respectively). The agreement between tests for macular problems was 75%. Participants and home healthcare nurses were generally satisfied with the eye-screening tool, although remarks for further improvements were made. CONCLUSIONS: The eye-screening tool is promising for nurse-assisted eye screening in older adults receiving home healthcare, with the mostly satisfactory agreement. After implementing the eye-screening tool in practice, cost-effectiveness needs to be investigated

Predicting unplanned hospital visits in older home care recipients: a cross-country external validation study.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked DownloadBackground: Accurate identification of older persons at risk of unplanned hospital visits can facilitate preventive interventions. Several risk scores have been developed to identify older adults at risk of unplanned hospital visits. It is unclear whether risk scores developed in one country, perform as well in another. This study validates seven risk scores to predict unplanned hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) visits in older home care recipients from six countries. Methods: We used the IBenC sample (n = 2446), a cohort of older home care recipients from six countries (Belgium, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Italy and The Netherlands) to validate four specific risk scores (DIVERT, CARS, EARLI and previous acute admissions) and three frailty indicators (CHESS, Fried Frailty Criteria and Frailty Index). Outcome measures were unplanned hospital admissions, ED visits or any unplanned hospital visits after 6 months. Missing data were handled by multiple imputation. Performance was determined by assessing calibration and discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)). Results: Risk score performance varied across countries. In Iceland, for any unplanned hospital visits DIVERT and CARS reached a fair predictive value (AUC 0.74 [0.68-0.80] and AUC 0.74 [0.67-0.80]), respectively). In Finland, DIVERT had fair performance predicting ED visits (AUC 0.72 [0.67-0.77]) and any unplanned hospital visits (AUC 0.73 [0.67-0.77]). In other countries, AUCs did not exceed 0.70. Conclusions: Geographical validation of risk scores predicting unplanned hospital visits in home care recipients showed substantial variations of poor to fair performance across countries. Unplanned hospital visits seem considerably dependent on healthcare context. Therefore, risk scores should be validated regionally before applied to practice. Future studies should focus on identification of more discriminative predictors in order to develop more accurate risk scores. Keywords: Emergency department visits; Geographical validation; Home care; Risk prediction models; Unplanned hospitalizations.European Commissio