The effect of climate changes on incidence of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo; a systematic review with meta-analysis of 16144 patients.

BACKGROUND: There were controversial findings in terms of the association between the incidence of Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (BPPV) and climate changes, so the current systematic review plus meta-analysis is designed to discover this possible relationship. METHODS: Web of science, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane library were systematically searched up to August 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and Problem/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) guidelines were used. Two authors independently reviewed the eligible articles and assessed the quality of them. RESULTS: In total, 15 studies including 16144 patients met the inclusion criteria. Ten studies reported the relation of BPPV to monthly mean temperature, 7 to monthly average humidity, 4 to monthly average rainfall, 6 to monthly sunlight time, and 2 to average solar radiation. The incidence of BPPV was associated significantly with atmospheric pressure (P: 0.003) and rainfall (P: 0.017). However, there was not any statistically significant correlation between incidence of BPPV and humidity, sunlight time, temperature, and solar radiation level (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of BPPV was higher in cold months of a year in both northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere countries. Although it can be because of negative correlation with temperature, the current meta-analysis did not find any statistically significant negative correlation with temperature. In addition, the incidence of BPPV was associated significantly with atmospheric pressure (positive correlation) and rainfall (negative correlation).

Utility of MRI in the Outpatient Evaluation of Patients With Chronic Continuous or Recurrent Dizziness.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the utility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in outpatient evaluation of patients with chronic continuous or recurrent dizziness (CCRD) and determine whether certain patient characteristics, symptoms, or examination findings are associated with diagnostic MRI findings. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ambulatory center. PATIENTS: 304 patients who received an MRI for CCRD. INTERVENTION: Diagnostic utility of MRI in patients with CCRD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: MRI diagnostic findings in patients with CCRD and associated patient characteristics, symptoms, or examination findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, 304 patients who visited an outpatient clinic between 1998 and 2023 and underwent MRI for CCRD, without previously diagnosed neurological abnormalities, were examined. The study investigated the relationship between demographic characteristics, comorbidities, clinical symptoms, and examination findings with diagnostic MRI findings. Univariate analysis was used to identify factors predictive of diagnostic MRI findings. RESULTS: Out of 304 patients, 11 (3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-5.72%) had diagnostic MRI findings. The most common diagnostic finding (36.4%) was brain metastasis, seen only in patients with previously diagnosed metastatic cancer. Univariate analysis revealed that hypertension (p = 0.004, likelihood ratio [LR] = 2.51), hyperlipidemia (p = 0.004, LR = 2.91), and cancer (p = 0.021, LR = 2.96) were significantly associated with diagnostic MRI findings. Incidental findings were observed in 73 patients (24%; 95% CI, 19.2-28.8%). Outside of cancer patients, six (2.3%; 95% CI, 1.1-5.0%) had diagnostic MRI findings. CONCLUSION: In our study, MRI rarely displayed diagnostic findings in patients with CCRD and normal neurologic examination. However, individuals with hypertension, hyperlipidemia, or cancer were significantly more likely to display positive MRI findings. It is essential to carefully consider the need for MRI when assessing patients with CCRD.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Age-Related Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVE: Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a prevalent but often underdiagnosed and undertreated condition among individuals aged 50 and above. It is associated with various sociodemographic factors and health risks including dementia, depression, cardiovascular disease, and falls. While the causes of ARHL and its downstream effects are well defined, there is a lack of priority placed by clinicians as well as guidance regarding the identification, education, and management of this condition. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the identification and management of ARHL. These opportunities are communicated through clear actionable statements with explanation of the support in the literature, evaluation of the quality of the evidence, and recommendations on implementation. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 50 years and older. The target audience is all clinicians in all care settings. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of ARHL. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The GDG made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (KAS 4) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should obtain or refer to a clinician who can obtain an audiogram. (KAS 8) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, appropriately fit amplification to patients with ARHL. (KAS 9) Clinicians should refer patients for an evaluation of cochlear implantation candidacy when patients have appropriately fit amplification and persistent hearing difficulty with poor speech understanding. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should screen patients aged 50 years and older for hearing loss at the time of a health care encounter. (KAS 2) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should examine the ear canal and tympanic membrane with otoscopy or refer to a clinician who can examine the ears for cerumen impaction, infection, or other abnormalities. (KAS 3) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should identify sociodemographic factors and patient preferences that influence access to and utilization of hearing health care. (KAS 5) Clinicians should evaluate and treat or refer to a clinician who can evaluate and treat patients with significant asymmetric hearing loss, conductive or mixed hearing loss, or poor word recognition on diagnostic testing. (KAS 6) Clinicians should educate and counsel patients with hearing loss and their family/care partner(s) about the impact of hearing loss on their communication, safety, function, cognition, and quality of life (QOL). (KAS 7) Clinicians should counsel patients with hearing loss on communication strategies and assistive listening devices. (KAS 10) For patients with hearing loss, clinicians should assess if communication goals have been met and if there has been improvement in hearing-related QOL at a subsequent health care encounter or within 1 year. The GDG offered the following KAS as an option: (KAS 11) Clinicians should assess hearing at least every 3 years in patients with known hearing loss or with reported concern for changes in hearing.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Age-Related Hearing Loss Executive Summary.

OBJECTIVE: Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a prevalent but often underdiagnosed and undertreated condition among individuals aged 50 and above. It is associated with various sociodemographic factors and health risks including dementia, depression, cardiovascular disease, and falls. While the causes of ARHL and its downstream effects are well defined, there is a lack of priority placed by clinicians as well as guidance regarding the identification, education, and management of this condition. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the identification and management of ARHL. These opportunities are communicated through clear actionable statements with an explanation of the support in the literature, the evaluation of the quality of the evidence, and recommendations on implementation. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 50 years and older. The target audience is all clinicians in all care settings. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the Guideline Development Group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of ARHL. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The GDG made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (KAS 4) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should obtain or refer to a clinician who can obtain an audiogram. (KAS 8) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, appropriately fit amplification to patients with ARHL. (KAS 9) Clinicians should refer patients for an evaluation of cochlear implantation candidacy when patients have appropriately fit amplification and persistent hearing difficulty with poor speech understanding. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should screen patients aged 50 years and older for hearing loss at the time of a health care encounter. (KAS 2) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should examine the ear canal and tympanic membrane with otoscopy or refer to a clinician who can examine the ears for cerumen impaction, infection, or other abnormalities. (KAS 3) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should identify sociodemographic factors and patient preferences that influence access to and utilization of hearing health care. (KAS 5) Clinicians should evaluate and treat or refer to a clinician who can evaluate and treat patients with significant asymmetric hearing loss, conductive or mixed hearing loss, or poor word recognition on diagnostic testing. (KAS 6) Clinicians should educate and counsel patients with hearing loss and their family/care partner(s) about the impact of hearing loss on their communication, safety, function, cognition, and quality of life. (KAS 7) Clinicians should counsel patients with hearing loss on communication strategies and assistive listening devices. (KAS 10) For patients with hearing loss, clinicians should assess if communication goals have been met and if there has been improvement in hearing-related quality of life at a subsequent health care encounter or within 1 year. The GDG offered the following KAS as an option: (KAS 11) Clinicians should assess hearing at least every 3 years in patients with known hearing loss or with reported concern for changes in hearing.