Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 26, 2025

Testing of all Six Semicircular Canals with Video Head Impulse Test Systems
Published on: April 18, 2019
Quantitative vestibular assessment: The development and validation of a novel, remote video head impulse test against
Raymond J So1,2, Ashley Cevallos1, Macie Pile1
1Department of Otolaryngology Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Objectives:
To develop a novel remote head impulse test (rHIT), and to provide preliminary data validating the rHIT vestibular-ocular reflex (VOR) gains against the in-clinic vHIT.
Methods:
A convenience sample of 10 patients referred for vestibular assessment at our institution was recruited. In-clinic vHIT was used to quantify lateral VOR gains. Patients subsequently underwent an rHIT protocol, whereby patients performed active, lateral head rotations while their eyes and heads were recorded using a laptop camera and video-conferencing software. The vHIT and rHIT VOR gains were compared using paired t-tests, and a Pearson correlation coefficient between the gains was calculated. Absolute accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the rHIT were additionally calculated.
Results:
Of the 10 patients recruited, 4 were male, and the average ± standard deviation (SD) age was 61.4 ± 15.3 years. As determined by the vHIT, 2 patients had normal bilateral VOR gains, 6 with unilateral vestibular hypofunction, and 2 with bilateral vestibular hypofunction. The correlation between the rHIT and vHIT gains was 0.73 (p < .001). The rHIT exhibited an absolute accuracy of 75.0%, sensitivity of 70.0%, and specificity of 80.0%. When ears had a vHIT VOR gain less than 0.40, the rHIT exhibited 100.0% accuracy. Conversely, 60.0% of deficient ears with vHIT VOR gains greater than 0.40 were incorrectly categorized by the rHIT.
Conclusion:
The rHIT may be better suited for detecting more severe vestibular deficiencies. Future iterations of the rHIT should aim to increase the video frame-rate capabilities to detect subtler VOR impairments.
Level Of Evidence:
4.

