[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.211.120.181. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Download PDF
Figure 1.
Number of maneuvers among 61 patients with postural restriction after canalith repositioning. BPPV indicates benign paroxysmal positional vertigo.

Number of maneuvers among 61 patients with postural restriction after canalith repositioning. BPPV indicates benign paroxysmal positional vertigo.

Figure 2.
Number of maneuvers among 56 patients without postural restriction after canalith repositioning. BPPV indicates benign paroxysmal positional vertigo.

Number of maneuvers among 56 patients without postural restriction after canalith repositioning. BPPV indicates benign paroxysmal positional vertigo.

Table. 
Number of Maneuvers Among 119 Ears in Patients With and Without Postural Restriction*
Number of Maneuvers Among 119 Ears in Patients With and Without Postural Restriction*
1.
Barany  R Diagnose von Krankheitserschenungen im Bereiche des Otolithenapparates. Acta Otolaryngol 1921;2434- 437Article
2.
Dix  MRHallpike  CS The pathology, symptomatology and diagnosis of certain common disorders of the vestibular system. Proc Soc Med 1952;45341- 354
3.
Wanamaker  HH Surgical treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: operative techniques. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;12124- 128Article
4.
Baloh  RWSakala  SMHonrubia  V Benign paroxysmal positional nystagmus. Am J Otolaryngol 1979;11- 6
PubMedArticle
5.
Schuknecht  HF Cupulolithiasis. Arch Otolaryngol 1969;90765- 778
PubMedArticle
6.
Hall  SFRuby  RRFMcClure  JA The mechanics of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. J Otolaryngol 1979;8151- 158
PubMed
7.
Schuknecht  HF Positional vertigo: clinical and experimental observations. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1962;66319- 332
8.
Semont  AFreyss  GVitte  E Curing the BPPV with a liberatory maneuver. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 1988;42290- 293
PubMed
9.
Epley  JM The canalith repositioning procedure: for treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1992;107399- 404
PubMed
10.
Marciano  EMarcelli  V Postural restrictions in labyrintholithiasis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2002;259262- 265
PubMedArticle
11.
Nuti  DNati  CPassali  D Treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: no need for postmaneuver restrictions. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122440- 444
PubMed
12.
Moon  SJBae  SHKim  HDKim  JHCho  YB The effect of postural restrictions in the treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2005;262408- 411
PubMedArticle
13.
Massoud  EASIreland  DJ Post-treatment instructions in the nonsurgical management of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. J Otolaryngol 1996;25121- 125
PubMed
14.
Harvey  SAHain  TCAdamiec  LC Modified liberatory maneuver: effective treatment for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Laryngoscope 1994;1041206- 1212
PubMedArticle
15.
Tirelli  GD’Orlando  EZarcone  OGiacomarra  VRussolo  M Modified particle repositioning procedure. Laryngoscope 2000;100(pt 1)462- 468Article
16.
Ruckenstein  MJ Therapeutic efficacy of the Epley canalith repositioning maneuver. Laryngoscope 2001;111940- 945
PubMedArticle
17.
Herdman  SJTusa  RJZee  DSProctor  LRMattox  DE Single treatment approaches to benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1993;119450- 454
PubMedArticle
18.
Wolf  JSBoyev  KPManokey  BJMattox  DE Success of the modified Epley maneuver in treating benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Laryngoscope 1999;109900- 903
PubMedArticle
19.
Pollak  LDavies  RALuxon  LL Effectiveness of the particle repositioning maneuver in benign paroxysmal positional vertigo with and without additional vestibular pathology. Otol Neurotol 2002;2379- 83
PubMedArticle
20.
Epley  JM Caveats in particle repositioning for treatment of canalithiasis (BPPV). Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;868- 76Article
21.
Tirelli  GD’Orlando  EGiacomarra  VRussolo  M Benign positional vertigo without detectable nystagmus. Laryngoscope 2001;1111053- 1056
PubMedArticle
22.
Li  JC Mastoid oscillation: a critical factor for success in the canalith repositioning procedure. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;112670- 675
PubMedArticle
23.
Hamid  M The maneuvers for benign positional vertigo. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;12148- 150Article
24.
Motamed  MOsinubi  OCook  JA Effect of mastoid oscillation on the outcome of the canalith repositioning procedure. Laryngoscope 2004;1141296- 1298
PubMedArticle
25.
Haberkamp  TJHamid  M The Epley or canalith repositioning maneuvers for classic benign positional vertigo. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;12151- 153Article
26.
Nunez  RACass  SPFurman  JM Short- and long-term outcomes of canalith repositioning for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122647- 652
PubMed
27.
Haynes  DSResser  JRLabadie  RF  et al.  Treatment of benign positional vertigo using the Semont maneuver: efficacy in patients presenting without nystagmus. Laryngoscope 2002;112796- 801
PubMedArticle
Original Article
May 2006

Efficacy of Postural Restriction in Treating Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: First Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Şişli Etfal Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006;132(5):501-505. doi:10.1001/archotol.132.5.501
Abstract

Objective  To investigate the efficacy of postural restriction after canalith repositioning in treating benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV).

Design  Prospective trial of patients with postural restriction vs those without postural restriction after treatment.

Patients  Patients with classic BPPV and with BPPV without nystagmus were treated using the modified Epley canalith repositioning procedure. Patients were randomly separated into 2 groups. The first group was instructed to wear a cervical collar and to maintain an upright head position for 2 days. The second group had no motion restriction. After 5 days, the patients were followed up and evaluated using the Dix-Hallpike test.

Results  In the first group, 56 of 62 ears healed after the first maneuver, and the remaining ears healed after the second. In the second group, 45 of 57 ears healed after the first maneuver, 6 after the second, and 5 (with subsequent postural restriction) after the third (1 ear did not improve). Five patients in the first group and 3 patients in the second group had BPPV without nystagmus; all of these patients healed after a single maneuver. The difference between the 2 groups in the number of maneuvers required for treatment was statistically significant (P<.05). The number of patients who required a third maneuver was significantly higher in the second group (P<.05).

Conclusions  Postural restriction enhances the therapeutic effect of canalith repositioning in the treatment of posterior semicircular canal BPPV. The long-term efficacy of postural restriction in preventing BPPV recurrence has not been demonstrated.

In 1921, Barany1 first described benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), which is the most common cause of dizziness and occurs due to head motion, resulting in temporary vertigo. The posterior semicircular canal (SCC) is usually affected. Dix and Hallpike2 described the condition as the presence of a temporary vertigo attack (5-30 seconds) at the end of a latency period. The diagnosis is confirmed by the presence of vertical upbeating and rotatory-type nystagmus toward the lower ear, nystagmus developing in the opposite direction, and vertigo when brought back to the seated position. Resolution of vertigo and nystagmus is typical with resumption of the positioning maneuver.3,4

There are 2 main hypotheses to explain the development of BPPV. In the first, Schucknecht5 advocates the cupulolithiasis theory, which is based on the attachment of otolithic debris to the cupula in the crista ampullaris. In the second, Hall et al6 propose the canalithiasis theory, which is based on the presence of free-floating debris in the canal. Both theories support the presence of foreign particles in the SCC as a cause of vertigo. It has also been speculated that these particles are otoliths of calcium carbonate originating from the macula of the utricle.7 It is not known how these particles detach from the utricle.

The liberating maneuver by Semont et al8 and the canalith repositioning procedure (CRP) by Epley9 yield high success rates, even after single maneuvers. However, the success rates are variable based on different techniques, including different waiting periods in the positions, the use of mastoid oscillation during the maneuvers, repeated maneuvers during a single treatment session, and reverse migration of some particles. An important component of the treatment protocol is the application of postural restriction following the CRP to prevent the return of these particles into the SCC. However, some authors argue that postural restriction is irrelevant to treatment success and is a patient burden.1013

In this study, the variables affecting the success of treatment in patients who underwent the modified Epley CRP were evaluated. The effects of postural restriction on treatment success were prospectively investigated.

METHODS

Ear, nose, and throat and neurologic examinations were performed on patients who were initially seen with vertigo symptoms. Audiometric tests were conducted when indicated. The Dix-Hallpike test was performed on patients wearing Frenzel glasses.2 Among patients with vertigo and vertical upbeating and torsional nystagmus toward the lower ear, those who had vertigo and nystagmus in the opposite direction while seated were diagnosed as having classic BPPV. Patients with rotatory vertigo after the Dix-Hallpike maneuver but who did not have nystagmus underwent a second Dix-Hallpike maneuver 2 hours later. Patients with classic vertigo that was ipsilateral, had similar characteristics and latency, and was accompanied by typical agitation were followed up in a separate group of patients with BPPV without nystagmus.

Fifteen to 20 minutes after the Dix-Hallpike test, patients underwent the modified Epley CRP. During the maneuver, the patient's head was leaning off the examination table and was rotated 45° toward the affected ear. The patient was placed in a supine position with the neck forcibly extended, keeping the extension slightly less than maximal. The head was supported by the examiners (B.Ö.Ç., İ.E., and Z.A.Ç.), and the patient's eyes were open. Three minutes later, the head was rotated 90° toward the other side. Care was taken during this rotation to keep the patient's head in extension and to prevent even the slightest flexion. After waiting 3 more minutes in this position, the whole body was turned 90° toward the opposite side, and the patient reclined on his or her shoulder. The patient's head was kept motionless during this rotation. Three minutes later, the patient was placed in a seated position and was brought to 20° to 30° flexion without disturbing the 45° position. Three minutes later, the head was brought into the normal position, and after waiting 3 minutes in this position, the test was completed.

The patients were randomly separated into 2 groups. In the first group, the patients were instructed to wear a cervical collar for 2 days and to keep the neck immobile. These patients were also instructed to elevate their heads in bed using 2 to 3 pillows for 2 days and to refrain from turning toward the affected ear. The patients were followed up after 5 days and were evaluated using the Dix-Hallpike test. The maneuver was repeated in patients who were found to have nystagmus and vertigo.

In the second group, the patients had no motion restriction after the maneuvers and were encouraged to perform all kinds of movements. At follow-up, the patients were questioned regarding their movements and activities and were excluded from the analysis if they had refrained from turning to the affected side during sleep, performed head elevation, avoided sudden head movements or steadied their heads as if wearing a cervical collar, or stayed at home and rested instead of performing daily activities. A second maneuver was performed in patients who demonstrated vertigo and nystagmus on the Dix-Hallpike test. Patients with vertigo and nystagmus at the third visit were instructed to maintain postural restriction after receiving the modified Epley CRP. These patients were followed up 5 days later.

Patients were also interviewed via telephone and were evaluated for early and late recurrence of BPPV. Pharmacologic agents were not used, except for 1 patient in each group. Statistical analysis was performed using χ2 and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty patients, 66 women and 54 men, diagnosed as having posterior BPPV were included in the study. The first group was instructed to maintain postural restriction and included 61 patients. The second group had no postural restriction and included 59 patients. During the follow-up examinations after the first Epley CRPs, 3 patients in the second group were found to be subconsciously performing postural restriction and were excluded from the analysis; the remaining 56 patients were evaluated. The mean age in the first group was 49 years (age range, 23-78 years). The mean age in the second group was 48 years (age range, 24-82 years). The mean durations of vertigo symptoms were 28.4 days (range, 1-300 days) in the first group and 30.1 days (range, 1-200 days) in the second group. One patient in each group had bilateral posterior SCC involvement. In the first group, 1 patient had posterolateral SCC BPPV, and the posterior canal was treated first. Five patients in the first group and 3 patients in the second group had BPPV without nystagmus. Overall, 61 patients and 62 ears in the first group and 56 patients and 57 ears in the second group (117 patients and 119 ears total) were evaluated.

In the first group, 48 of 54 patients with unilateral BPPV healed after the first maneuver, and the remaining 6 patients healed after the second maneuver (Figure 1). One patient with bilateral involvement underwent maneuvers on both sides, starting with the more severe side, and both sides healed after the first maneuvers. Five patients without nystagmus healed after a single maneuver. The Epley maneuver was performed on the patient with posterolateral BPPV on the right side, with healing after the first maneuver. In the second group, 40 of 52 patients with unilateral BPPV healed after the first maneuver, and 6 patients healed after the second maneuver (Figure 2). In the remaining 6 patients, postural restriction was prescribed following the Epley maneuver. Of these, 5 were noted to be healed at the follow-up examination, while vertigo and nystagmus had persisted in a 66-year-old woman for 15 days (nystagmus duration, 18 seconds, with a 1-second latency period). She had no predisposing factor for BPPV. The Semont salvage maneuver was performed, with no improvement. Another patient with bilateral BPPV had complete healing on both sides after single maneuvers. In 3 patients without nystagmus, symptoms disappeared after single maneuvers.

In the first group, 56 of 62 ears healed after the first maneuver, and the remaining ears healed after the second maneuver (Table). In the second group, 45 of 57 ears healed after the first maneuver, 6 after the second maneuver, and 5 (with subsequent postural restriction) after the third maneuver. The difference between the 2 groups in the number of maneuvers required for treatment was statistically significant (P<.05, χ2 test). In addition, the number of patients who required a third maneuver was significantly higher in the second group (P<.05, Fisher exact test).

The follow-up period ranged from 6 to 20 months. Telephone interviews were conducted with 53 of 61 patients with postural restriction, and 10 patients (18.9%) were found to have recurrences. Telephone interviews were conducted with 45 of 56 patients without postural restriction, and 9 patients (20.0%) were found to have recurrences. The difference in recurrence rates was not significant (P>.05, χ2 test).

COMMENT

Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo is a common peripheral vestibular disorder that may resolve spontaneously or may persist for months or years, with significant effects on a patient's social life. Because of its persistence, the term benign may be inappropriate. The maneuvers by Semont et al8 and by Epley9 effectively treat BPPV. However, studies823 demonstrate a wide range of results, with 44% to 100% of patients obtaining resolution of positional vertigo using these maneuvers. These variable results can be explained by the different techniques used in the studies. For example, Epley9 recommends repeated maneuvers during single treatment sessions. Other authors perform the maneuver only once per session.12,1419 We used a single maneuver per session to avoid patient fatigability and to minimize reentry of otoconial debris into the posterior SCC.

Position durations during the CRP also varied. In a study by Epley,20 the duration was based on nystagmus time, with a typical pause of 6 to 13 seconds in each position. In the study by Moon et al,12 patients paused 1 minute in each position after the resolution of nystagmus. Ruckenstein16 maintained each position for 2 minutes. Harvey et al14 kept patients in the first position after disappearance of nystagmus and turned the head 15° to 20° in the opposite direction, with 30 seconds in each position. In other studies,17,18 the patient paused 4 minutes in the first position (the Dix-Hallpike position), with the head turned slowly (during 1 minute) to the opposite Dix-Hallpike position; after 4 minutes, the patient slowly sat up. Pollak et al19 maintained their patients 1 to 2 minutes in each position. Tirelli et al21 recommended during the CRP that patients remain in various positions for 3 to 4 minutes. In our study, we changed head positions after waiting 3 minutes in each position to allow time for the detachment of particles that may have adhered to the posterior canal wall and cupula and to enable complete motion in the channel without residue.

Another application believed to be effective in the treatment of BPPV that differs among authors is the use of mastoid oscillation during the CRP, as recommended by Epley.9 The application increased in popularity after Li22 described the use of an oscillator placed on the mastoid process. Hamid23 suggested that mechanical vibration is helpful in resistant cases of BPPV. Other authors believe that the use of mastoid oscillation does not affect treatment success and do not recommend it.18,24 In our study, we attained high success rates during BPPV treatment without using mastoid oscillation.

These studies demonstrate personalized techniques during the CRP, with variable success rates. Significant differences in the technique of the CRP include (1) positioning and pause duration in each position, (2) the use of mastoid oscillation, and (3) postmaneuveral postural restriction. All of these variables independently affect treatment success. While some authors9,14,1720,22,25,26 favor the use of postural restriction after the maneuvers to avoid dumping of canaliths into the canal, others1013 find this unnecessary and uncomfortable for the patients. Epley9,20 recommended that patients remain in a head-upright position for 48 hours after the procedure and suggested that recurrence within days to weeks is likely due to suboptimal technique or a patient's poor adherence to postprocedural instructions.20 In several other studies,14,1719 investigators recommended that patients remain in a head-upright position for 48 hours; in other studies,25,26 patients were instructed to refrain from laying flat or from engaging in vigorous physical exercise for at least 24 hours. In other studies,14,17,22 patients were instructed to refrain from lying on the affected side for at least 1 week. Other authors advocate that patients use cervical collars for 2 days.17,18,22 These differences demonstrate significant variation among authors in the literature concerning the application of postural restriction.

Controlled studies1012 of the efficacy of postural restriction have not shown that it significantly increases the success rate of the maneuver. Massoud and Ireland13 found it unnecessary to require postural restriction, but they recommended that patients avoid sudden head movements. Our success with postural restriction suggests its beneficial effect on patient outcomes. In our group of patients with postural restriction, 56 of 62 ears healed after the first maneuver, and the remaining ears healed after the second maneuver. In our group of patients without postural restriction, 45 of 57 ears healed after the first maneuver, and 6 ears healed after the second maneuver. In the remaining 6 ears, postural restriction was applied after the CRP, with only 1 patient demonstrating persisting vertigo and nystagmus. The difference between the 2 groups in the number of maneuvers required for treatment was statistically significant. In 2 studies12,13 in which postural restriction did not affect the success of the CRP, the authors recommended avoidance of sudden head movements, thus proposing motion restriction among patients without motion restriction. In our study, we believe that the unlimited motion allowed among patients in the group without postural restriction led to the lower success rates.

Most patients with long-standing vertigo develop stiffness in the neck and modify their activities to avoid sudden head turns and refrain from laying on the affected (ear) side. We believe that time is required for otolithic debris to adhere to the receptor organ macula. In patients who do not have vertigo and nystagmus after the CRP, dizziness and lightheadedness, especially after sudden linear movements, continue for 2 to 3 days as a result of particles that reach the utricle but do not assume the original position in the macula.

Our study did not reveal any significant difference between the study groups for recurrence of BPPV. During the follow-up period of 6 to 20 months, recurrence rates among patients with and without postural restriction were 18.9% and 20.0%, respectively (P>.05). These rates were 12.5% and 9.1% in the study by Moon et al,12 who also did not find a difference between study groups during a follow-up period of 3 months. Other studies10,12 also did not show any effect of postural restriction on recurrence. Epley9 demonstrated a 30% recurrence rate during a follow-up period of up to 30 months. In another study,26 the recurrence rate was 26.8%, with a mean follow-up of 15.9 months and a 15% recurrence rate per year. The results of our study were in concordance with the literature.

In our study, 8 patients with subjective symptoms of vertigo but without clinical evidence of positional typical nystagmus were diagnosed as having BPPV without nystagmus and were followed up in a separate group; all of these patients healed after a single maneuver. In some studies,21,27 BPPV was diagnosed without the presence of nystagmus, the objective sign of BPPV, and successful results were obtained with the repositioning maneuver. Haynes et al27 found rates of 63% and 23% for complete and partial recovery, respectively, and Tirelli et al21 found rates of 60.5% and 32.5%, respectively. One patient in our study who reported only symptoms of vertigo demonstrated nystagmus during the Dix-Hallpike maneuver that was absent during the CRP. This is probably because, despite the deposition of particles causing vertigo in the canal, they did not reach the critical mass that causes nystagmus, resulting in a milder clinical picture.

Numerous variables affect the treatment success among patients with posterior SCC BPPV. According to Epley,20 the most common problem is particles that fail to traverse the apex of the canal, occurring most frequently when the head is not extended sufficiently in the first and second positions. As long as the patient does not have neck-related complaints, we believe that forced extension of the neck with the head supported (as opposed to slight extension) will ease the detachment of particles from the cupula and channel wall, aided by the increased effect of gravity. This movement will also prevent reverse migration caused by insufficient extension during passage from the first position to the second position. We attribute our high success rates (approaching 99%) to the achievement of sufficient extension and to our waiting time of 3 minutes.

In conclusion, postural restriction enhances the therapeutic effect of the CRP in the treatment of posterior SCC BPPV and should be applied in resistant cases. The CRP should be performed even among patients diagnosed as having BPPV without nystagmus. The long-term efficacy of postural restriction in preventing BPPV recurrence has not been demonstrated.

Back to top
Article Information

Correspondence: Burak Ö. Çakır, MD, First Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Şişli Etfal Research and Training Hospital, Eyüp Sultan C. Sadabad Parkevleri A-2 Blok Daire 23, Kagithane/Istanbul Turkey.

Submitted for Publication: June 7, 2005; final revision received October 26, 2005; accepted January 16, 2006.

Financial Disclosure: None.

References
1.
Barany  R Diagnose von Krankheitserschenungen im Bereiche des Otolithenapparates. Acta Otolaryngol 1921;2434- 437Article
2.
Dix  MRHallpike  CS The pathology, symptomatology and diagnosis of certain common disorders of the vestibular system. Proc Soc Med 1952;45341- 354
3.
Wanamaker  HH Surgical treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: operative techniques. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;12124- 128Article
4.
Baloh  RWSakala  SMHonrubia  V Benign paroxysmal positional nystagmus. Am J Otolaryngol 1979;11- 6
PubMedArticle
5.
Schuknecht  HF Cupulolithiasis. Arch Otolaryngol 1969;90765- 778
PubMedArticle
6.
Hall  SFRuby  RRFMcClure  JA The mechanics of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. J Otolaryngol 1979;8151- 158
PubMed
7.
Schuknecht  HF Positional vertigo: clinical and experimental observations. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1962;66319- 332
8.
Semont  AFreyss  GVitte  E Curing the BPPV with a liberatory maneuver. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 1988;42290- 293
PubMed
9.
Epley  JM The canalith repositioning procedure: for treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1992;107399- 404
PubMed
10.
Marciano  EMarcelli  V Postural restrictions in labyrintholithiasis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2002;259262- 265
PubMedArticle
11.
Nuti  DNati  CPassali  D Treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: no need for postmaneuver restrictions. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122440- 444
PubMed
12.
Moon  SJBae  SHKim  HDKim  JHCho  YB The effect of postural restrictions in the treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2005;262408- 411
PubMedArticle
13.
Massoud  EASIreland  DJ Post-treatment instructions in the nonsurgical management of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. J Otolaryngol 1996;25121- 125
PubMed
14.
Harvey  SAHain  TCAdamiec  LC Modified liberatory maneuver: effective treatment for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Laryngoscope 1994;1041206- 1212
PubMedArticle
15.
Tirelli  GD’Orlando  EZarcone  OGiacomarra  VRussolo  M Modified particle repositioning procedure. Laryngoscope 2000;100(pt 1)462- 468Article
16.
Ruckenstein  MJ Therapeutic efficacy of the Epley canalith repositioning maneuver. Laryngoscope 2001;111940- 945
PubMedArticle
17.
Herdman  SJTusa  RJZee  DSProctor  LRMattox  DE Single treatment approaches to benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1993;119450- 454
PubMedArticle
18.
Wolf  JSBoyev  KPManokey  BJMattox  DE Success of the modified Epley maneuver in treating benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Laryngoscope 1999;109900- 903
PubMedArticle
19.
Pollak  LDavies  RALuxon  LL Effectiveness of the particle repositioning maneuver in benign paroxysmal positional vertigo with and without additional vestibular pathology. Otol Neurotol 2002;2379- 83
PubMedArticle
20.
Epley  JM Caveats in particle repositioning for treatment of canalithiasis (BPPV). Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;868- 76Article
21.
Tirelli  GD’Orlando  EGiacomarra  VRussolo  M Benign positional vertigo without detectable nystagmus. Laryngoscope 2001;1111053- 1056
PubMedArticle
22.
Li  JC Mastoid oscillation: a critical factor for success in the canalith repositioning procedure. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;112670- 675
PubMedArticle
23.
Hamid  M The maneuvers for benign positional vertigo. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;12148- 150Article
24.
Motamed  MOsinubi  OCook  JA Effect of mastoid oscillation on the outcome of the canalith repositioning procedure. Laryngoscope 2004;1141296- 1298
PubMedArticle
25.
Haberkamp  TJHamid  M The Epley or canalith repositioning maneuvers for classic benign positional vertigo. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;12151- 153Article
26.
Nunez  RACass  SPFurman  JM Short- and long-term outcomes of canalith repositioning for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122647- 652
PubMed
27.
Haynes  DSResser  JRLabadie  RF  et al.  Treatment of benign positional vertigo using the Semont maneuver: efficacy in patients presenting without nystagmus. Laryngoscope 2002;112796- 801
PubMedArticle
×