Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • Environmental factors that affect the Fukuda stepping test in normal participants

  • A Munnings, B Chisnall, S Oji, M Whittaker, R Kanegaonkar
  • Journal:
    The Journal of Laryngology & Otology / Volume 129 / Issue 5 / May 2015
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    30 March 2015, pp. 450-453
    Print publication:
    May 2015
  • Background:

    The Fukuda stepping test is commonly used to assess peripheral vestibular function. It has, however, been suggested that its maximal sensitivity and specificity are 70 per cent and 50 per cent, respectively. This study was undertaken to evaluate environmental factors that may influence the reliability of this assessment and hence to ‘sharpen’ its use in a clinical setting.

    Methods:

    Forty-four participants aged between 20 and 43 years were asked to perform the Fukuda stepping test in both a standard clinic room and a soundproofed room under the following conditions in a randomised order: on the floor versus on foam; with and without a sound-localising source; and with and without ear defenders.

    Results:

    Significant differences in the extent of rotation were found when comparing the results obtained in several settings, including standing on the floor in a standard room versus a soundproofed room (p = 0.036), and standing on foam in a standard room versus a soundproofed room (p = 0.015).

    Conclusion:

    Our results suggest that certain alterations to the test environment may improve the sensitivity of this clinical examination.