A three-group comparison of acute-onset dizzy, long-term dizzy and non-dizzy older patients in primary care.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The hypothesis of increased cardiovascular risk contributing to chronic dizziness has been discussed controversially so far. We investigated older patients suffering from acute (<6 months), chronic (≥ 6 months) or no dizziness, in terms of their cardiovascular risk and other impairments. METHODS: A cross-sectional three-group comparison of 257 patients (65+) presenting at family medicine surgeries in Germany was performed. Measures of cardiovascular risk, including overall scores, scores of quality of life (SF-12), activities of daily living (ADL), depression (GDS), dizziness handicap (DHI) and patients' needs (DiNA), as well as comorbidity and medication, were compared in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, systolic and diastolic blood pressure were significantly lower in the dizziness groups. The overall cardiovascular risk was not increased in dizzy patients. Anxiety was strongly associated with dizziness, whereas other associations were of marginal importance. In multivariate analysis, age (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.17), female gender (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.01-4.26) and anxiety (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.03-6.05) were associated with acute dizziness, whereas only female gender was significant in chronic dizziness (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.02- 3.75). Comparing all dizzy patients with the non-dizzy group, lower systolic blood pressure was also significantly associated with dizziness. CONCLUSIONS: Results from our sample suggest that low systolic blood pressure is more important for dizziness in older patients than increased cardiovascular risk. Acute-onset and long-term dizzy patients were comparable in many aspects, which makes this classification less clinically important.

[Frequency of dizziness-related diagnoses and prescriptions in a general practice database]. / Diagnosehäufigkeiten und Verordnungen bei Schwindel im Patientenkollektiv einer hausärztlichen Routinedatenbank.

INTRODUCTION: Dizziness can be due to multiple causes. However, the aetiology often remains unclear. At the same time, there is a lack of evidence-based treatment options. The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency of dizziness-related diagnoses, referrals and prescriptions in a general practice database. METHODS: Data from computerized patient records of 138 general practices participating in the MedViP project were used for cross-sectional analysis of the time period April 2001 until December 2002. The identification of dizzy patients was performed via ICD-10 diagnoses, free text fields and medication issued for dizziness. Frequencies were counted and odds ratios calculated to describe associations between diagnoses and medication. RESULTS: For the period of investigation, 10,971 patients (from a total of 317,042 documented patients) were given at least one diagnosis of dizziness (prevalence 3.4%; mean age 59 years, 67.2% female). In 80.2% of the cases dizziness was coded as a symptom (R42) rather than a discrete disease. Prescriptions for dizziness were rather uncommon. An analysis of ATC codes showed that 6.6% of all affected patients were prescribed a specific drug for dizziness, most frequently betahistine. Antiemetics were prescribed in 7.1%, and the homeopathic preparation "Vertigoheel" in 2.8% of the dizzy patients. Betahistine was significantly more often prescribed for "unspecified" dizziness, vestibular neuritis, and benign paroxysmal positional vertigo; but not for Meniere's disease. It was given less often in "other peripheral" and in central vertigo as well as in cases where the symptom was coded (R42). 3.9% of the dizzy patients had been referred to the neurologist (55.4%), ENT-specialist (30.5%) or to both specialists (14.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The manner of coding and prescribing reflects both a symptom-orientated classification used by general practitioners and the limitation of treatment options.