VOMS Baseline Versus Postinjury: A Comparison of a Standardized Novel Prototype and a Virtual Reality Application in Sport-Related Concussion.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Philip Pavilionis, Madison Fenner, Kristen G Quigley, Isayas Berhe Adhanom, Ryan N Moran, Monique Passalacqua, Brian Szekely, Nicholas G Murray
{"title":"VOMS Baseline Versus Postinjury: A Comparison of a Standardized Novel Prototype and a Virtual Reality Application in Sport-Related Concussion.","authors":"Philip Pavilionis, Madison Fenner, Kristen G Quigley, Isayas Berhe Adhanom, Ryan N Moran, Monique Passalacqua, Brian Szekely, Nicholas G Murray","doi":"10.1177/19417381251355959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The novel prototype (PRO) or virtual reality (VR) are viable methods of standardization to reduce administration variability during the Vestibular Ocular Motor Screening (VOMS) test. Little is known regarding how sport-related concussion (SRC) responds to VOMS in VR.</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>There will be no difference between PRO and VR total symptom provocation change score (TSPCS), individual subtest symptoms, and near point convergence (NPC) distance within the first 72 hours after SRC.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cohort study.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>At baseline, 394 Division I student-athletes (female, 154; average age, 20.8 ± 1.4 years) completed VOMS using PRO, and 511 (female, 223; average age, 20.9 ± 6.6 years) using VR. Within 72 hours of an SRC, 29 participants (female, 18; 20.6 ± 1.4 years) completed VOMS using PRO and 22 (female, 10; 21.1 ± 1.3 years) using VR. Participants reported subjective symptoms of headache, dizziness, nausea, and fogginess before the test began and after each VOMS subtest in VR. Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> tests assessed differences in TSPCS, NPC distance, and subtest symptoms between PRO and VR at baseline and postinjury (PI). Baseline to PI for each modality was also examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant difference was observed for TSPCS (PRO PI, 10.2 ± 11.3; VR PI, 10.5 ± 12.9; <i>P</i> = 0.51) and NPC distance (PRO PI, 5.30 ± 6.1 cm; VR PI, 2.80 ± 0.51 cm; <i>P</i> = 0.75) for PRO versus VR at PI. This trend continued with all subtests.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this Division I collegiate population, symptom provocation during the VOMS in VR is not different than with PRO at PI; however, this comparison was underpowered as no a priori sample size calculation was conducted.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>VR does not provoke additional symptoms PI. VR may be used as a viable method for VOMS test standardization and delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":54276,"journal":{"name":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","volume":" ","pages":"19417381251355959"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12313604/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19417381251355959","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The novel prototype (PRO) or virtual reality (VR) are viable methods of standardization to reduce administration variability during the Vestibular Ocular Motor Screening (VOMS) test. Little is known regarding how sport-related concussion (SRC) responds to VOMS in VR.

Hypothesis: There will be no difference between PRO and VR total symptom provocation change score (TSPCS), individual subtest symptoms, and near point convergence (NPC) distance within the first 72 hours after SRC.

Study design: Cohort study.

Level of evidence: Level 3.

Methods: At baseline, 394 Division I student-athletes (female, 154; average age, 20.8 ± 1.4 years) completed VOMS using PRO, and 511 (female, 223; average age, 20.9 ± 6.6 years) using VR. Within 72 hours of an SRC, 29 participants (female, 18; 20.6 ± 1.4 years) completed VOMS using PRO and 22 (female, 10; 21.1 ± 1.3 years) using VR. Participants reported subjective symptoms of headache, dizziness, nausea, and fogginess before the test began and after each VOMS subtest in VR. Mann-Whitney U tests assessed differences in TSPCS, NPC distance, and subtest symptoms between PRO and VR at baseline and postinjury (PI). Baseline to PI for each modality was also examined.

Results: No significant difference was observed for TSPCS (PRO PI, 10.2 ± 11.3; VR PI, 10.5 ± 12.9; P = 0.51) and NPC distance (PRO PI, 5.30 ± 6.1 cm; VR PI, 2.80 ± 0.51 cm; P = 0.75) for PRO versus VR at PI. This trend continued with all subtests.

Conclusion: In this Division I collegiate population, symptom provocation during the VOMS in VR is not different than with PRO at PI; however, this comparison was underpowered as no a priori sample size calculation was conducted.

Clinical relevance: VR does not provoke additional symptoms PI. VR may be used as a viable method for VOMS test standardization and delivery.

VOMS基线与损伤后:一种标准化的新型原型和虚拟现实在运动相关脑震荡中的应用比较
背景:新型样机(PRO)或虚拟现实(VR)是标准化的可行方法,以减少前庭眼运动筛查(VOMS)测试中给药的可变性。关于VR中运动相关脑震荡(SRC)对VOMS的反应,我们知之甚少。假设:在SRC后的前72小时内,PRO和VR的总症状激发改变评分(TSPCS)、个体亚测试症状和近点收敛(NPC)距离无差异。研究设计:队列研究。证据等级:三级。方法:在基线时,394名一级学生运动员(女,154名;平均年龄20.8±1.4岁)使用PRO完成VOMS, 511例(女性223例;平均年龄20.9±6.6岁)。在SRC的72小时内,29名参与者(女性,18岁;20.6±1.4岁)使用PRO完成VOMS, 22例(女性10例;(21.1±1.3年)。参与者在VR测试开始前和每个VOMS子测试后报告了头痛、头晕、恶心和模糊的主观症状。Mann-Whitney U测试评估了PRO和VR在基线和伤后(PI)时TSPCS、NPC距离和亚测试症状的差异。还检查了每种模式的PI基线。结果:两组TSPCS无显著性差异(PRO PI, 10.2±11.3;Vr pi, 10.5±12.9;P = 0.51)和鼻咽癌距离(PRO PI, 5.30±6.1 cm;VR PI, 2.80±0.51 cm;P = 0.75)。这一趋势在所有子测试中都得到了延续。结论:在一科大学人群中,VOMS在VR中的症状激发与PRO在PI中的症状激发无显著差异;然而,由于没有进行先验的样本量计算,这种比较的能力不足。临床相关性:VR不会引起额外的PI症状。虚拟现实技术可以作为VOMS测试标准化和交付的可行方法。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach
Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
101
期刊介绍: Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach is an indispensable resource for all medical professionals involved in the training and care of the competitive or recreational athlete, including primary care physicians, orthopaedic surgeons, physical therapists, athletic trainers and other medical and health care professionals. Published bimonthly, Sports Health is a collaborative publication from the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM), the National Athletic Trainers’ Association (NATA), and the Sports Physical Therapy Section (SPTS). The journal publishes review articles, original research articles, case studies, images, short updates, legal briefs, editorials, and letters to the editor. Topics include: -Sports Injury and Treatment -Care of the Athlete -Athlete Rehabilitation -Medical Issues in the Athlete -Surgical Techniques in Sports Medicine -Case Studies in Sports Medicine -Images in Sports Medicine -Legal Issues -Pediatric Athletes -General Sports Trauma -Sports Psychology
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信