Dizziness Handicap Inventory in Clinical Evaluation of Dizzy Patients

(1) Objectives: The evaluation of dizzy patients is difficult due to nonspecific symptoms that require a multi-specialist approach. The Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) is widely used in the assessment of dizziness-related disability, but its clinical efficacy needs further expansion. The aim of t...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ewa Zamyslowska-Szmytke, Piotr Politanski, Magdalena Jozefowicz-Korczynska
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-02-01
Series:International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Subjects:
DHI
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2210
Description
Summary:(1) Objectives: The evaluation of dizzy patients is difficult due to nonspecific symptoms that require a multi-specialist approach. The Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) is widely used in the assessment of dizziness-related disability, but its clinical efficacy needs further expansion. The aim of this study was to identify the subscales of DHI that may correlate with some vestibular or nonvestibular dysfunctions. (2) Material and methods: This observational study included 343 dizzy patients with one of the following clinical conditions: Vestibular impairment noncompensated or compensated, central or bilateral, benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), migraine and psychogenic dizziness. Principal component analysis was used to examine the factorial structure of the questionnaire. (3) Results: The DHI questionnaire total scoring and its vestibular subscale distinguished between patients with compensated and uncompensated vestibular dysfunction with positive predictive values of 76% and 79%, respectively. The DHI items composing the F3 (positional) subscale revealed the highest scoring in the BPPV group with 75% sensitivity and 92% negative predictive value (NPV) in reference to Dix–Hallpike tests. The DHI total score and the subscales scores correlated with anxiety-depression, and the highest correlation coefficients were calculated for vestibular (F2 0.56) and anxiety (F5 0.51) subscales. (4) Conclusions: Our analysis revealed that the DHI vestibular subscale distinguishes between patients with compensated and uncompensated vestibular dysfunction. The positional subscale showed the highest scoring in the BPPV group with high sensitivity and low specificity of the test. The DHI is highly correlated with patients’ psychological status.
ISSN:1661-7827
1660-4601