Fleur D Yen Pik Sang1, John F Golding, Michael A Gresty. 1. MRC Spatial Disorientation Group, Academic Dept. of Neuro-Otology, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London, United Kingdom. f.yenpiksang@imperial.ac.uk
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Anecdotal reports from aviators indicate that controlled breathing is used as a countermeasure for motion sickness. We report a trial on the effectiveness of focused, regular breathing on motion sickness. METHODS: Experiment 1 compared the effects of controlled breathing vs. a counting task on subjective ratings of motion sickness and associated symptoms (n = 12). Experiment 2 investigated the effects of attention (n = 12) on these measures by comparing the counting task with no task. Motion sickness was induced by whole body pitch oscillations (0.2 Hz, +/- 20 degrees peak amplitude) while subjects viewed a video image of the environment oscillating in 180 degrees counter phase. Subjects performed controlled breathing, counting, or no task from the onset of mild nausea to an endpoint of moderate nausea or 30 min motion exposure, whichever came first. RESULTS: Experiment 1: The mean time to reach motion endpoint was significantly longer (p = 0.01) for controlled breathing (21.3 min) than for counting (15.1 min). Controlled breathing also prolonged the time tolerated with nausea and reduced the recovery time after motion cessation. Experiment 2: The counting task had no effect on baseline motion sickness susceptibility. CONCLUSION: Controlled breathing may be effective for controlling nausea.
INTRODUCTION: Anecdotal reports from aviators indicate that controlled breathing is used as a countermeasure for motion sickness. We report a trial on the effectiveness of focused, regular breathing on motion sickness. METHODS: Experiment 1 compared the effects of controlled breathing vs. a counting task on subjective ratings of motion sickness and associated symptoms (n = 12). Experiment 2 investigated the effects of attention (n = 12) on these measures by comparing the counting task with no task. Motion sickness was induced by whole body pitch oscillations (0.2 Hz, +/- 20 degrees peak amplitude) while subjects viewed a video image of the environment oscillating in 180 degrees counter phase. Subjects performed controlled breathing, counting, or no task from the onset of mild nausea to an endpoint of moderate nausea or 30 min motion exposure, whichever came first. RESULTS: Experiment 1: The mean time to reach motion endpoint was significantly longer (p = 0.01) for controlled breathing (21.3 min) than for counting (15.1 min). Controlled breathing also prolonged the time tolerated with nausea and reduced the recovery time after motion cessation. Experiment 2: The counting task had no effect on baseline motion sickness susceptibility. CONCLUSION: Controlled breathing may be effective for controlling nausea.
Authors: Vitaly Napadow; James D Sheehan; Jieun Kim; Lauren T Lacount; Kyungmo Park; Ted J Kaptchuk; Bruce R Rosen; Braden Kuo Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2012-04-02 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Adam D Farmer; Vin F Ban; Steven J Coen; Gareth J Sanger; Gareth J Barker; Michael A Gresty; Vincent P Giampietro; Steven C Williams; Dominic L Webb; Per M Hellström; Paul L R Andrews; Qasim Aziz Journal: J Physiol Date: 2015-01-29 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Yoon-Hee Cha; John F Golding; Behrang Keshavarz; Joseph Furman; Ji-Soo Kim; Jose A Lopez-Escamez; Måns Magnusson; Bill J Yates; Ben D Lawson Journal: J Vestib Res Date: 2021 Impact factor: 2.354