Literature DB >> 11976760

Between-subject variability and within-subject reliability of the human eye-movement response to bilateral galvanic (DC) vestibular stimulation.

Hamish G MacDougall1, Agatha E Brizuela, Ann M Burgess, Ian S Curthoys.   

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that responses to surface galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) show substantial interindividual variation. Between-subject variability may be due to individual differences between subjects, or to the poor reliability of the test, or to differences in test details, or to host factors. The aim of the present study was to compare variability between and within subjects in binocular 3-D eye-movement responses to long-duration, maintained, large-amplitude, bilateral, bipolar, surface GVS. Subjects were seated and restrained, and in one condition fixated a small, centrally located visual target; in the other condition, testing was carried out in complete darkness. Surface GVS of 5 mA, with a rectangular waveform was delivered bilaterally for 5 min while eye movements were measured using computerised video-oculography (VTM). In the first experiment, ten subjects participated in both conditions in one session, and in the second experiment, two subjects participated in both conditions for a total of five repeated sessions. The stimulation was well tolerated by all subjects and produced a change in torsional position with the upper pole of both eyes rolling towards the anode and away from the cathode in all subjects in both conditions. Although little vertical nystagmus was evident in either condition, most subjects showed relatively strong horizontal nystagmus (slow phases towards the anode) in darkness. This study confirms previous observations that the torsional response to GVS is highly variable between subjects, whilst also showing for the first time that eye-movement responses to GVS show good within-subject repeatability. This study also demonstrates considerable between-subject variability in the relative ratios of response components (torsional and horizontal nystagmus, torsional position), whereas the relatively small within-subject variability can be characterised more by changes in the overall amplitude of the eye-movement response. Subjects show idiosyncratic oculomotor response patterns to GVS, varying slightly in absolute magnitude between sessions. Thus, GVS may be a more reliable stimulus than may have been anticipated from the literature.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11976760     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-002-1038-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  20 in total

1.  Effects of Galvanic vestibular stimulation on cognitive function.

Authors:  Valentina Dilda; Hamish G MacDougall; Ian S Curthoys; Steven T Moore
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Modeling postural instability with Galvanic vestibular stimulation.

Authors:  Hamish G MacDougall; Steven T Moore; Ian S Curthoys; F Owen Black
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-01-24       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 3.  Vestibular, locomotor, and vestibulo-autonomic research: 50 years of collaboration with Bernard Cohen.

Authors:  Theodore Raphan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Sinusoidal galvanic vestibular stimulation (sGVS) induces a vasovagal response in the rat.

Authors:  Bernard Cohen; Giorgio P Martinelli; Dmitri Ogorodnikov; Yongqing Xiang; Theodore Raphan; Gay R Holstein; Sergei B Yakushin
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Dynamic visual-vestibular integration during goal directed human locomotion.

Authors:  Nandini Deshpande; Aftab E Patla
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-07-20       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  In Vivo Localization of the Human Velocity Storage Mechanism and Its Core Cerebellar Networks by Means of Galvanic-Vestibular Afternystagmus and fMRI.

Authors:  Maxine Rühl; Rebecca Kimmel; Matthias Ertl; Julian Conrad; Peter Zu Eulenburg
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.847

7.  Influence of galvanic vestibular stimulation on egocentric and object-based mental transformations.

Authors:  Bigna Lenggenhager; Christophe Lopez; Olaf Blanke
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-08-24       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 8.  Electrical stimulation of cranial nerves in cognition and disease.

Authors:  Devin Adair; Dennis Truong; Zeinab Esmaeilpour; Nigel Gebodh; Helen Borges; Libby Ho; J Douglas Bremner; Bashar W Badran; Vitaly Napadow; Vincent P Clark; Marom Bikson
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2020-02-23       Impact factor: 8.955

9.  Transmastoid galvanic stimulation does not affect the vergence-mediated gain increase of the human angular vestibulo-ocular reflex.

Authors:  Americo A Migliaccio; Charles C Della Santina; John P Carey
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Calibrating balance perturbation using electrical stimulation of the vestibular system.

Authors:  R Goel; M J Rosenberg; H S Cohen; J J Bloomberg; A P Mulavara
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 2.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.