Leveraging virtual reality for vestibular testing: Clinical outcomes from tests of dynamic visual acuity.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Kenneth C Holford, Adam E Jagodinsky, Rishi Saripalle, Poonam McAllister
{"title":"Leveraging virtual reality for vestibular testing: Clinical outcomes from tests of dynamic visual acuity.","authors":"Kenneth C Holford,&nbsp;Adam E Jagodinsky,&nbsp;Rishi Saripalle,&nbsp;Poonam McAllister","doi":"10.3233/VES-200782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Virtual reality (VR) use as a platform for vestibular rehabilitation is widespread. However, the utility of VR based vestibular assessments remains unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare dynamic visual acuity (DVA) scores, perceived balance, and perceived dizziness when using traditional versus VR environments for DVA testing among healthy individuals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>DVA testing occurred for both a traditional clinical protocol and in a VR variant. Horizontal, vertical, and no head motion conditions were conducted for both clinical and VR test protocols. DVA scores, balance ratings, and dizziness ratings were obtained per condition. Two-way ANOVAs with repeated measures were used to assess differences in DVA scores, balance, and dizziness ratings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No differences in DVA results, balance or dizziness ratings were observed when comparing traditional clinical protocol versus the VR variant. Differences across head motion conditions were observed, with no motion trials exhibiting significantly higher DVA scores and perceived balance, and lower perceived dizziness compared to vertical and horizontal head motion. Vertical head motion exhibited this same trend compared to horizontal.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DVA testing conducted in VR demonstrated clinical utility for each measure. Effects of head motion were similar across test variants, indicating DVA testing in VR produces similar effects on vestibular function than traditional clinical testing. Additional research should be conducted to assess the feasibility of VR assessment in individuals with vestibular disorder.</p>","PeriodicalId":49960,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vestibular Research-Equilibrium & Orientation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vestibular Research-Equilibrium & Orientation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/VES-200782","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Virtual reality (VR) use as a platform for vestibular rehabilitation is widespread. However, the utility of VR based vestibular assessments remains unknown.

Objective: To compare dynamic visual acuity (DVA) scores, perceived balance, and perceived dizziness when using traditional versus VR environments for DVA testing among healthy individuals.

Methods: DVA testing occurred for both a traditional clinical protocol and in a VR variant. Horizontal, vertical, and no head motion conditions were conducted for both clinical and VR test protocols. DVA scores, balance ratings, and dizziness ratings were obtained per condition. Two-way ANOVAs with repeated measures were used to assess differences in DVA scores, balance, and dizziness ratings.

Results: No differences in DVA results, balance or dizziness ratings were observed when comparing traditional clinical protocol versus the VR variant. Differences across head motion conditions were observed, with no motion trials exhibiting significantly higher DVA scores and perceived balance, and lower perceived dizziness compared to vertical and horizontal head motion. Vertical head motion exhibited this same trend compared to horizontal.

Conclusion: DVA testing conducted in VR demonstrated clinical utility for each measure. Effects of head motion were similar across test variants, indicating DVA testing in VR produces similar effects on vestibular function than traditional clinical testing. Additional research should be conducted to assess the feasibility of VR assessment in individuals with vestibular disorder.

利用虚拟现实技术进行前庭测试:动态视力测试的临床结果。
背景:虚拟现实(VR)作为前庭康复的平台被广泛使用。然而,基于VR的前庭评估的实用性仍然未知。目的:比较健康人在使用传统环境和VR环境进行DVA测试时的动态视力(DVA)评分、感知平衡和感知头晕。方法:对传统临床方案和VR变体进行DVA检测。在水平、垂直和无头部运动条件下进行临床和VR测试方案。分别获得DVA评分、平衡评分和头晕评分。采用重复测量的双向方差分析来评估DVA评分、平衡和头晕评分的差异。结果:在比较传统临床方案和VR变体时,没有观察到DVA结果、平衡或头晕评分的差异。观察到不同头部运动条件下的差异,与垂直和水平头部运动相比,无运动试验显示DVA得分和感知平衡明显更高,感知头晕更低。与水平运动相比,垂直头部运动表现出同样的趋势。结论:在VR中进行的DVA测试证明了每种测量方法的临床实用性。不同测试变量对头部运动的影响相似,表明VR中的DVA测试对前庭功能的影响与传统临床测试相似。应该进行进一步的研究来评估VR评估在前庭障碍患者中的可行性。
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
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
66
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Vestibular Research is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes experimental and observational studies, review papers, and theoretical papers based on current knowledge of the vestibular system. Subjects of the studies can include experimental animals, normal humans, and humans with vestibular or other related disorders. Study topics can include the following: Anatomy of the vestibular system, including vestibulo-ocular, vestibulo-spinal, and vestibulo-autonomic pathways Balance disorders Neurochemistry and neuropharmacology of balance, both at the systems and single neuron level Neurophysiology of balance, including the vestibular, ocular motor, autonomic, and postural control systems Psychophysics of spatial orientation Space and motion sickness Vestibular rehabilitation Vestibular-related human performance in various environments
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信