Neuro-ophthalmic and Neuro-otologic Evaluation in Individuals with Motion Sickness Susceptibility.

Kübra Aydın, Eyyup Kara, Nurten Uzun Adatepe, Ahmet Atas
{"title":"Neuro-ophthalmic and Neuro-otologic Evaluation in Individuals with Motion Sickness Susceptibility.","authors":"Kübra Aydın, Eyyup Kara, Nurten Uzun Adatepe, Ahmet Atas","doi":"10.5152/iao.2024.241491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the physiological background of motion sickness is not entirely clear, it was aimed to examine the physiological differences in groups consisting of individuals susceptible and non-susceptible to motion sickness. Sixty subjects [motion sickness (MS) group: 33 female, 3 male; 28.8 ± 8.1 years; control group: 19 female, 5 male; 24.5 ± 4.3 years] were included in the study. Near visual acuity test on the treadmill in the presence of visual stimulation, pattern visual-evoked potentials, oculomotor tests, and computerized dynamic posturography were applied. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the parameter that provides the excellent discrimination between the groups. The most effective parameter in differentiating the study groups was determined as dynamic visual acuity with 77.8% sensitivity and 95.8% specificity. Significant differences were found in the vestibular (mean ± standard deviation: 0.63 ± 0.17), visual (0.77 ± 0.18), and composite scores (73.11 ± 11.89) of the patients (P=.000) in posturographic evaluation. In the visual-evoked potential examination, a significant decrease was found in the amplitude values between the P100-N145 waves in the binocular (5.0 ± 2.8, P=.002), right eye (7.6 ± 3.2, P=.009) and left eye (7.9 ± 2.9, P=.016) in the symptomatic patients. In binocular oculomotor evaluation, directional asymmetric findings were obtained. It has been shown that the most effective test parameter that distinguishes the MS susceptible and non-susceptible individuals is the dynamic visual acuity value. Based on the results of neuro-physiological tests, it was suggested that a possible visual-vestibular integration disorder in individuals susceptible to motion sickness may affect visual and vestibular performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":94238,"journal":{"name":"The journal of international advanced otology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11363172/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of international advanced otology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/iao.2024.241491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the physiological background of motion sickness is not entirely clear, it was aimed to examine the physiological differences in groups consisting of individuals susceptible and non-susceptible to motion sickness. Sixty subjects [motion sickness (MS) group: 33 female, 3 male; 28.8 ± 8.1 years; control group: 19 female, 5 male; 24.5 ± 4.3 years] were included in the study. Near visual acuity test on the treadmill in the presence of visual stimulation, pattern visual-evoked potentials, oculomotor tests, and computerized dynamic posturography were applied. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the parameter that provides the excellent discrimination between the groups. The most effective parameter in differentiating the study groups was determined as dynamic visual acuity with 77.8% sensitivity and 95.8% specificity. Significant differences were found in the vestibular (mean ± standard deviation: 0.63 ± 0.17), visual (0.77 ± 0.18), and composite scores (73.11 ± 11.89) of the patients (P=.000) in posturographic evaluation. In the visual-evoked potential examination, a significant decrease was found in the amplitude values between the P100-N145 waves in the binocular (5.0 ± 2.8, P=.002), right eye (7.6 ± 3.2, P=.009) and left eye (7.9 ± 2.9, P=.016) in the symptomatic patients. In binocular oculomotor evaluation, directional asymmetric findings were obtained. It has been shown that the most effective test parameter that distinguishes the MS susceptible and non-susceptible individuals is the dynamic visual acuity value. Based on the results of neuro-physiological tests, it was suggested that a possible visual-vestibular integration disorder in individuals susceptible to motion sickness may affect visual and vestibular performance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对晕车患者进行神经眼科和神经视力评估。
由于晕动病的生理背景尚不完全清楚,我们的目的是研究晕动病易感人群和非易感人群的生理差异。晕动病(MS)组:33 名女性,3 名男性;28.8 ± 8.1 岁;对照组:19 名女性,5 名男性;24.8 ± 8.1 岁:对照组:19 名女性,5 名男性;24.5 ± 4.3 岁]。研究人员在跑步机上进行了视觉刺激下的近视力测试、模式视觉诱发电位、眼球运动测试和计算机动态体位测量。通过接收器操作特征分析,确定了能在各组之间提供极佳区分度的参数。结果表明,区分研究组最有效的参数是动态视力,敏感性为 77.8%,特异性为 95.8%。患者的前庭(平均值±标准差:0.63±0.17)、视力(0.77±0.18)和综合评分(73.11±11.89)在脑电图后评估中存在显著差异(P=.000)。在视觉诱发电位检查中,发现症状患者双眼(5.0 ± 2.8,P=.002)、右眼(7.6 ± 3.2,P=.009)和左眼(7.9 ± 2.9,P=.016)的 P100-N145 波之间的振幅值明显下降。在双眼眼球运动评估中,得到了方向不对称的结果。研究表明,区分多发性硬化症易感者和非易感者最有效的测试参数是动态视力值。根据神经生理学测试的结果,研究人员认为,运动病易感者可能存在视觉-前庭整合障碍,这可能会影响视觉和前庭的表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Audio-vestibular Findings in a Patient with Pelizaeus- Merzbacher Disease. Cavernous Hemangioma of the Mastoid Antrum. Cochlear Implantation in Single-Sided Deafness and Asymmetric Hearing Loss: 12 Months Follow-up Results of a European Multicenter Evaluation. Comparison of Conventional Technique with Suture Fixation and Subperiosteal Tight Pocket Technique on Revision Cochlear Implantation Rate. Comparison of Total Endoscopic Ear Surgery and Microscopic Postauricular Canal-Wall-Down Approach on Primary Acquired Cholesteatoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1