Reliability and repeatability of testing visual evoked potential habituation in migraine: A blinded case-control study

Anna Ambrosini; Gianluca Coppola; Ennio Iezzi; Francesco Pierelli; Jean Schoenen

doi:10.1177/0333102416648656

Reliability and repeatability of testing visual evoked potential habituation in migraine: A blinded case-control study

Anna Ambrosini, Gianluca Coppola, Ennio Iezzi, Francesco Pierelli, Jean Schoenen

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many studies have shown that migraine patients have an interictal habituation deficit of visual evoked potentials (VEPs). Some discordant results were attributed to non-blinded analyses and a lack of repeatability.

AIMS: In this study, we compared blinded and non-blinded analyses of the same recordings and assessed test-retest repeatability.

METHODS: VEP recordings of 25 healthy volunteers (HVs) and 78 episodic migraine patients (EMs; 52 interictal, 26 ictal) were analysed by two investigators, one of whom was blinded to diagnosis and headache phase. Twelve HVs and nine EMs had two recordings for test repeatability.

RESULTS: In both blinded and non-blinded analyses, VEP habituation was normal in HVs and EMs during an attack, but deficient in EMs interictally. Intra-individual habituation percentages were highly correlated in two recordings separated by ≥7 days.

CONCLUSIONS: The studies showing a VEP habituation deficit in migraineurs between attacks are unlikely to be biased by non-blinding analysis or poor repeatability.

Original language	English
Journal	Cephalalgia
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102416648656
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - May 6 2016

Keywords

Journal Article

Access to Document

10.1177/0333102416648656

Cite this

@article{a712431fac9944eaa4ea893d9372e265,

title = "Reliability and repeatability of testing visual evoked potential habituation in migraine: A blinded case-control study",

abstract = "BACKGROUND: Many studies have shown that migraine patients have an interictal habituation deficit of visual evoked potentials (VEPs). Some discordant results were attributed to non-blinded analyses and a lack of repeatability.AIMS: In this study, we compared blinded and non-blinded analyses of the same recordings and assessed test-retest repeatability.METHODS: VEP recordings of 25 healthy volunteers (HVs) and 78 episodic migraine patients (EMs; 52 interictal, 26 ictal) were analysed by two investigators, one of whom was blinded to diagnosis and headache phase. Twelve HVs and nine EMs had two recordings for test repeatability.RESULTS: In both blinded and non-blinded analyses, VEP habituation was normal in HVs and EMs during an attack, but deficient in EMs interictally. Intra-individual habituation percentages were highly correlated in two recordings separated by ≥7 days.CONCLUSIONS: The studies showing a VEP habituation deficit in migraineurs between attacks are unlikely to be biased by non-blinding analysis or poor repeatability.",

keywords = "Journal Article",

author = "Anna Ambrosini and Gianluca Coppola and Ennio Iezzi and Francesco Pierelli and Jean Schoenen",

note = "{\textcopyright} International Headache Society 2016.",

year = "2016",

month = may,

day = "6",

doi = "10.1177/0333102416648656",

language = "English",

journal = "Cephalalgia",

issn = "0333-1024",

publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability and repeatability of testing visual evoked potential habituation in migraine

T2 - A blinded case-control study

AU - Ambrosini, Anna

AU - Coppola, Gianluca

AU - Iezzi, Ennio

AU - Pierelli, Francesco

AU - Schoenen, Jean

PY - 2016/5/6

Y1 - 2016/5/6

N2 - BACKGROUND: Many studies have shown that migraine patients have an interictal habituation deficit of visual evoked potentials (VEPs). Some discordant results were attributed to non-blinded analyses and a lack of repeatability.AIMS: In this study, we compared blinded and non-blinded analyses of the same recordings and assessed test-retest repeatability.METHODS: VEP recordings of 25 healthy volunteers (HVs) and 78 episodic migraine patients (EMs; 52 interictal, 26 ictal) were analysed by two investigators, one of whom was blinded to diagnosis and headache phase. Twelve HVs and nine EMs had two recordings for test repeatability.RESULTS: In both blinded and non-blinded analyses, VEP habituation was normal in HVs and EMs during an attack, but deficient in EMs interictally. Intra-individual habituation percentages were highly correlated in two recordings separated by ≥7 days.CONCLUSIONS: The studies showing a VEP habituation deficit in migraineurs between attacks are unlikely to be biased by non-blinding analysis or poor repeatability.

AB - BACKGROUND: Many studies have shown that migraine patients have an interictal habituation deficit of visual evoked potentials (VEPs). Some discordant results were attributed to non-blinded analyses and a lack of repeatability.AIMS: In this study, we compared blinded and non-blinded analyses of the same recordings and assessed test-retest repeatability.METHODS: VEP recordings of 25 healthy volunteers (HVs) and 78 episodic migraine patients (EMs; 52 interictal, 26 ictal) were analysed by two investigators, one of whom was blinded to diagnosis and headache phase. Twelve HVs and nine EMs had two recordings for test repeatability.RESULTS: In both blinded and non-blinded analyses, VEP habituation was normal in HVs and EMs during an attack, but deficient in EMs interictally. Intra-individual habituation percentages were highly correlated in two recordings separated by ≥7 days.CONCLUSIONS: The studies showing a VEP habituation deficit in migraineurs between attacks are unlikely to be biased by non-blinding analysis or poor repeatability.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1177/0333102416648656

DO - 10.1177/0333102416648656

M3 - Article

C2 - 27154996

JO - Cephalalgia

JF - Cephalalgia

SN - 0333-1024

ER -

Reliability and repeatability of testing visual evoked potential habituation in migraine: A blinded case-control study

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this