The vestibular system senses head motion and facilitates gaze stabilization, allowing for clear vision during movement. The vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) causes the eyes to move opposite head motion, thus maintaining focus on a target. Consequently, uncompensated loss of vestibular function leads to reduced VOR function resulting in dizziness, nausea, and visual disturbance. Different testing methods have been developed to measure VOR loss. These tests generally require bulky, expensive equipment, and must be performed by a trained examiner. A newly developed digital form of the dynamic visual acuity (DVA) test requires less equipment, is cost-effective, and may be performed at home making it more accessible. The purpose of this study was to determine the validity and test-retest reliability of the digital DVA test and provide normative data for healthy adults. Fifteen adults – 10 female and 5 male (mean age = 22.0 ± 3.1, range: 19-31 years) – completed the study. Exclusion criteria included age older than 49 years, history of vestibular or neurological disorders, and history of significant head injury. Subjects were screened for normal vestibular function using video head impulse testing. The study consisted of two visits, 3-15 days apart. Participants underwent DVA testing with both the validated NeuroCom (InVision software) system and newly developed digital DVA during the initial visit and the digital DVA during the second visit. The digital DVA system consists of a laptop computer paired with a head/eye tracker (Tobii Eye Tracker 5) and Health in Motion software (Blue Marble Health Company). Outcome measures of interest were the difference between static and dynamic visual acuity measured in LogMAR (DVA loss) for rightward and leftward head movement. Pearson Product-Moment bivariate correlations were used to determine validity of the digital DVA outcomes compared to NeuroCom outcomes. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to determine test-retest reliability of the digital DVA. Pearson correlation coefficients for validity were r = 0.025 and r = -0.015 for left and right DVA loss, respectively. ICCs for test-retest reliability were r = 0.366 and r = 0.313 for left and right DVA loss, respectively. Mean values across both sessions for left and right DVA loss measured by digital DVA were 0.26 ± 0.13 and 0.26 ± 0.11, respectively. Correlations between the digital DVA and standard computerized DVA were poor indicating the need for further development of the current digital system/software. Test-retest reliability for the digital DVA system in its current state was also poor. Tobii sensor used in the software is limited by a 200 ms delay in reporting head motion to the software. Future development of a digital DVA may need to consider other sensors. The current digital DVA will not replace the computerized system; however, it may provide important information for clinicians who do not have access to computerized DVA.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ETSU/oai:dc.etsu.edu:honors-2004 |
| Date | 01 December 2023 |
| Creators | Grunstra, Lydia F., Hall, Courtney D., Stressman, Kara D. |
| Publisher | Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University |
| Source Sets | East Tennessee State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | Undergraduate Honors Theses |
| Rights | Copyright by the authors., http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ |
Page generated in 0.0023 seconds