Cargando…
Assessment of vestibulo-ocular reflex and its adaptation during stop-and-go car rides in motion sickness susceptible passengers
Motion sickness is a physiological condition that negatively impacts a person's comfort and will be an emerging condition in autonomous vehicles without proper countermeasures. The vestibular system plays a key role in the origin of motion sickness. Understanding the susceptibility and (mal) ad...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10224860/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37097301 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-023-06619-4 |
Sumario: | Motion sickness is a physiological condition that negatively impacts a person's comfort and will be an emerging condition in autonomous vehicles without proper countermeasures. The vestibular system plays a key role in the origin of motion sickness. Understanding the susceptibility and (mal) adaptive mechanisms of the highly integrated vestibular system is a prerequisite for the development of countermeasures. We hypothesize a differential association between motion sickness and vestibular function in healthy individuals with and without susceptibility for motion sickness. We quantified vestibular function by measuring the high-frequency vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) using video head impulse testing (vHIT) in 17 healthy volunteers before and after a 11 min motion sickness-inducing naturalistic stop-and-go car ride on a test track (Dekra Test Oval, Klettwitz, Germany). The cohort was classified as motion sickness susceptible (n = 11) and non-susceptible (n = 6). Six (out of 11) susceptible participants developed nausea symptoms, while a total of nine participants were free of these symptoms. The VOR gain (1) did not differ significantly between participant groups with (n = 8) and without motion sickness symptoms (n = 9), (2) did not differ significantly in the factor time before and after the car ride, and showed no interaction between symptom groups and time, as indicated by a repeated measures ANOVA (F(1,15) = 2.19, p = 0.16. Bayesian inference confirmed that there was “anecdotal evidence” for equality of gain rather than difference across groups and time (BF(10) < 0.77). Our results suggest that individual differences in VOR measures or adaptation to motion sickness provocative stimuli during naturalistic stop-and-go driving cannot predict motion sickness susceptibility or the likelihood of developing motion sickness. |
---|