ISSN: 1300 - 6525 E-ISSN: 2149 - 0880
kulak burun boğaz
ve baş boyun cerrahisi dergisi
http://dergi.kbb-bbc.org.tr
Koşulsuz Destek Verenler

Kayıtlı İndeksler








ORIGINAL RESEARCH

The Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version of the European Evaluation of Vertigo Scale (EEV-TR)
Avrupa Vertigo Değerlendirme Ölçeği (EEV-TR) Türkçe Versiyonunun Geçerlilik ve Güvenilirliği
Received Date : 28 Feb 2022
Accepted Date : 20 May 2022
Available Online : 07 Jul 2022
Doi: 10.24179/kbbbbc.2022-89332 - Makale Dili: EN
KBB ve BBC Dergisi. 2022;30(3):139-45
Copyright © 2020 by Turkey Association of Society of Ear Nose Throat and Head Neck Surgery. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
ABSTRACT
Objective: The aim of this study is to make validity and reliability analyze with the Turkish adaptation of the European Evaluation of Vertigo Scale (EEV-TR). Material and Methods: Patients who applied to the otorhinolaryngology department with vestibular complaints were included in the study (n=100). EEV scale was adapted into Turkish from the original language. EEV-TR questionnaire and Vertigo Symptom Scale-TR (VSS-TR) assessments of the patients were performed twice, on the baseline and on the 4th week. Results: One hundred participants (65 women, 35 men) with a mean age of 50.87±14.94 were enrolled in the research. The mean age of 35 (35%) male patients was 55.51±12.41, and the mean age of 65 (65%) female patients was 48.5±15.75. 77 patients were diagnosed with BPPV, 18 patients with Meniere’s disease, and 5 patients with vestibular neuronitis. The Cronbach’s alpha value of the EEV-TR was calculated as 0.712 in the baseline measurement and 0.864 in the 4th-week measurement. The intraclass correlation coefficient of the EEV-TR was 0.835. A significant correlation was found between EEV-TR and VSS-TR baseline measurements (r=.411, p=0.001) and between 4th-week measurements (r=.649, p˂0.001). EEV-TR factorial accumulation was consistent with the original scale. The BPPV discriminative power of the EEV-TR scale was medium to high (p<0.01). Conclusion: EEV-TR is a valid and reliable scale that can be used in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with vestibular complaints.
ÖZET
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, Avrupa Vertigo Değerlendirme Ölçeği’nin [European Evaluation of Vertigo (EEV-TR)] Türkçeye uyarlanması ile geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizlerinin yapılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: EEV Ölçeği, orijinal dilinden Türkçeye uyarlandı. Kulak burun boğaz polikliniğine Kulak burun boğaz polikliniğine vestibuler yakınmalarla başvuran 100 hasta çalışmaya dâhil edildi. Hastaların EEV Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonu ve Vertigo Semptom Skalasının Türkçe versiyonu değerlendirmeleri ilk muayenede ve 4. haftada olmak üzere 2 kez yapıldı. Bulgular: Yaş ortalaması 50,87±14,94 olan 100 katılımcı (35 erkek, 65 kadın) çalışmaya alındı. Otuz beş (%35) erkek katılımcının yaş ortalamasının 55,51±12,41, 65 (%65) kadın katılımcının yaş ortalamasının ise 48,5±15,75 olduğu belirlendi. Yetmiş yedi hasta benign paroksismal pozisyonel vertigo, 18 hasta Meniere hastalığı, 5 hasta ise vestibüler nörinit tanısı aldı. EEV Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonunun Cronbach alfa değeri ilk muayenede 0,712, 4. hafta ölçümünde 0,864 olarak hesaplandı. EEV-TR’nin sınıf içi korelasyon katsayısı 0,835 idi. EEV-TR ve Vertigo Semptom Skalası’nın Türkçe versiyonu başlangıç ölçümleri (r=.411, p=0,001) ve 4. hafta ölçümleri (r=.649, p˂0,001) arasında anlamlı bir ilişki bulundu. EEV Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonunun faktöriyel dağılımı orijinal ölçekle uyumluydu. EEV-TR Ölçeği’nin benign paroksismal pozisyonel vertigoyu ayırt edici gücü orta-yüksek seviyedeydi (p<0,01). Sonuç: EEV Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonu, vestibüler şikâyetleri olan hastaların değerlendirilmesinde ve takibinde kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçektir.
KAYNAKLAR
  1. Duracinsky M, Mosnier I, Bouccara D, Sterkers O, Chassany O; Working Group of the Société Française d'Oto-Rhino-Laryngologie (ORL). Literature review of questionnaires assessing vertigo and dizziness, and their impact on patients' quality of life. Value Health. 2007;10(4):273-84. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  2. Viergever K, Kraak JT, Bruinewoud EM, Ket JCF, Kramer SE, Merkus P. Questionnaires in otology: a systematic mapping review. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):119. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  3. Mègnigbêto CA, Sauvage JP, Launois R. [The European Evaluation of Vertigo (EEV) scale: a clinical validation study]. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord). 2001;122(2):95-102. [PubMed] 
  4. Guneri EA, Kustutan O. The effects of betahistine in addition to epley maneuver in posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;146(1):104-8. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  5. Eryaman E, Gökcan G, Parmaksız E, Acar NO, Ozlüoğlu LN. Are thiazides effective on hypertensive vertigo? A preliminary study. Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg. 2012;22(4):219-24. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  6. Tan M, Cengiz DU, Demir İ, Demirel S, Çolak SC, Karakaş O, et al. Effects of Covid-19 on the audio-vestibular system (published online ahead of print, 2021 Aug 10). Am J Otolaryngol. 2021;43(1):103173. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  7. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186-91. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  8. Yanik B, Külcü DG, Kurtais Y, Boynukalin S, Kurtarah H, Gökmen D. The reliability and validity of the Vertigo Symptom Scale and the Vertigo Dizziness Imbalance Questionnaires in a Turkish patient population with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. J Vestib Res. 2008;18(2-3):159-70. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  9. Yardley L, Masson E, Verschuur C, Haacke N, Luxon L. Symptoms, anxiety and handicap in dizzy patients: development of the vertigo symptom scale. J Psychosom Res. 1992;36(8):731-41. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  10. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34-42. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  11. Baumgartner TA, Chung H. Confidence limits for intraclass reliability coefficients. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci. 2001;5(3):179-88. [Crossref] 
  12. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2009.
  13. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1996. p.49-56.
  14. Adamec I, Skorić MK, Handžić J, Barušić AK, Bach I, Gabelić T, et al. The role of cervical and ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials in the follow-up of vestibular neuritis. Clin EEG Neurosci. 2014;45(2):129-36. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  15. Patel M, Williamsom RA, Dorevitch S, Buchanan S. Pilot study investigating the effect of the static magnetic field from a 9.4-T MRI on the vestibular system. J Occup Environ Med. 2008;50(5):576-83. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  16. Venail F, Attali P, Wersinger E, Gomeni R, Poli S, Schmerber S. Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of the novel H4 receptor inhibitor SENS-111 using a modified caloric test in healthy subjects. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018;84(12):2836-48. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC] 
  17. Monsell EM. New and revised reporting guidelines from the Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium. American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, Inc. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995;113(3):176-8. [Crossref]  [PubMed] 
  18. John E. Ware, Jr. The SF-36 health survey. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1996. p.337-45.