Primary Image

Rehabilitation Measures

University of California Los Angeles Dizziness Questionnaire

Last Updated


Designed by Honrubia et al., (1996), The University of California Los Angeles Dizziness Questionnaire (UCLA-DQ) was designed to collect information on the severity, frequency and fear of dizziness and its effect on quality of life and activities of daily living. The goal in the tool development was to develop a tool that was easy to understand, quick to administer and that was equally applicable to all dizzy patients. The tool was designed to provide the clinician significant information about the impact of dizziness on the patient’s life. The tool was designed as a screening tool that provides clear, concise information in regards to the impact that dizziness has on an individual’s everyday life. The UCLA-DQ is designed to address the physical, emotional and functional aspects of dizziness in a five question, easy to administer, easy to interpret questionnaire.

Acronym UCLA-DQ

Area of Assessment

Activities of Daily Living
Life Participation
Quality of Life

Assessment Type

Patient Reported Outcomes

Administration Mode

Paper & Pencil




  • Vestibular Disorders

Key Descriptions

  • The UCLA-DQ is a 5-item forced-choice, self-reported subjective questionnaire.
  • The five questions measure dizziness frequency, severity, fear and impact on quality of life and activities of daily living.
  • The answer choices on the 5-point Likert scale are presented in ascending order from 1, indicating least severe, to 5, indicating most severe.
  • The score ranges from 5-25 with higher scores indicating most severity.If an individual does not have dizziness at all, 0 points are given.

Number of Items


Equipment Required

  • Questionnaire

Time to Administer

5 minutes

Required Training

No Training

Age Ranges


18 - 64


Elderly Adult

65 +


Instrument Reviewers

Reviewed with references for individuals with vestibular disorders by Tracy Rice, PT, MPH, NCS and Jenny Fay, PT, DPT, NCS and the Vestibular EDGE task force of the Neurology Section of the APTA (2013).

Body Part


ICF Domain

Body Function

Measurement Domain

Activities of Daily Living

Professional Association Recommendation

Recommendations for use of the instrument from the Neurology Section of the American Physical Therapy Association’s Multiple Sclerosis Taskforce (MSEDGE), Parkinson’s Taskforce (PD EDGE), Spinal Cord Injury Taskforce (PD EDGE), Stroke Taskforce (StrokEDGE), Traumatic Brain Injury Taskforce (TBI EDGE), and Vestibular Taskforce (Vestibular EDGE) are listed below. These recommendations were developed by a panel of research and clinical experts using a modified Delphi process.

For detailed information about how recommendations were made, please visit:




Highly Recommend




Reasonable to use, but limited study in target group  / Unable to Recommend


Not Recommended

Recommendations for use based on acuity level of the patient:



(CVA < 2 months post)

(SCI < 1 month post) 

(Vestibular < 6 weeks post)


(CVA 2 to 6 months)

(SCI 3 to 6 months)


(> 6 months)

(Vestibular > 6 weeks post)

Vestibular EDGE




Recommendations based on vestibular diagnosis




Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (BPPV)


Vestibular EDGE





Recommendations for entry-level physical therapy education and use in research:


Students should learn to administer this tool? (Y/N)

Students should be exposed to tool? (Y/N)

Appropriate for use in intervention research studies? (Y/N)

Is additional research warranted for this tool (Y/N)

Vestibular EDGE






Limited psychometric properties should be considered before use. Has reliably been translated into Spanish.

Do you see an error or have a suggestion for this instrument summary? Please e-mail us

Non-Specific Patient Population

back to Populations

Cut-Off Scores

Scores range from 5-25; 5 being the least severe and 25 being most severe, with no cut-off score established. 

(Kammerlind, et al, 2011) 

  • 0 point given if an individual does not experience dizziness at all.

Test/Retest Reliability

Not Established for the original version; 

(Kammerlind et al., 2011) 

  • Test-retest reliability (ICC, 0.089) in subjects with remaining symptoms after AUVL in the Swedish translation version of the scale. 


(Perez et al., 2001) 

  • Cronbach’s ɑ = 0.8236 for the Spanish version of the questionnaire

Construct Validity

(Perez et al., 2001) 

  • A significant relationship (p < 0.01) was found between item one, frequency of dizziness, item two, severity of dizziness and the other 3-items on the questionnaire. Factor analysis identified a two-factor solution for the UCLA-DQ that accounts for 75.43% of the variance 
  • Excellent correlation between vestibular handicap factor and DHI emotional (DHIe) subscale r = 0.927 p < 0.001, and DHI functional subscale (DHIf) r = 0.743 p < 0.001. 
  • Adequate correlation between vestibular handicap factor and the DHI physical (DHIp) subscale r = 0.317 p < 0.001
  • Excellent correlation between vestibular disability factor and the DHI emotional r = 0.912 p  < 0.001
  • Poor correlation between vestibular disability factor and the DHIf subscale 0.425 p < 0.001
  • Adequate correlation between vestibular disability factor and DHI physical subscale r = 0.714 p < 0.001


Honrubia, V., Bell, T. S., et al. (1996). "Quantitative evaluation of dizziness characteristics and impact on quality of life." Am J Otol 17(4): 595-602. Find it on PubMed

Kammerlind, A. S., Ledin, T. E., et al. (2011). "Recovery after acute unilateral vestibular loss and predictors for remaining symptoms." Am J Otolaryngol 32(5): 366-375. Find it on PubMed

Perez, N., Garmendia, I., et al. (2001). "Factor analysis and correlation between Dizziness Handicap Inventory and Dizziness Characteristics and Impact on Quality of Life scales." Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 545: 145-154.