Suppression of the E-effect during the subjective visual and postural vertical test in healthy subjects

Clinical Assessment of Subjective Visual and Haptic Vertical Norms in Healthy Adults

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Accurate verticality perception is essential for daily life activities, such as correctly estimating object orientation in space. This study established normative data for the subjective visual vertical (SVV) and subjective haptic vertical (SHV) using the portable and self-constructable modified Bucket test and Rotating-Column test. Additionally, the contribution of age, sex, and starting position of the line/ column on SVV and SHV accuracy were evaluated.

METHOD

This study, part of the PRECISE project (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05978596), was conducted following the STROBE guidelines. Healthy adults without visual/neurological/vestibular disorders were recruited. Subjective visual vertical and SHV accuracy were described in terms of constant errors (i.e., mean deviation from 0° [true vertical] respecting its direction), unsigned errors (i.e., mean deviation from 0° irrespective of direction), and variability (i.e., intra-individual standard deviation).

RESULTS

Sixty participants were evaluated (mean age: 41.14 [SD = 16.74] years). Subjective visual vertical constant errors between -2.82° and 2.90°, unsigned errors up to 2.15°, and variability up to 1.61° are considered normal. Subjective haptic vertical constant errors ranged from -6.94° to 8.18°, unsigned errors up to 6.66° and variability up to 4.25°. Higher ages led to higher SVV unsigned errors and variability. SHV variability was higher in females compared to males. Certain starting positions led to higher SVV and SHV constants and SVV unsigned errors.

DISCUSSION

Normative data are provided for affordable, self-constructable, and portable SVV and SHV tools. These norms are consistent with more sophisticated equipment and can be used to distinguish between normal and abnormal values.

Do we need to consider head-on-body position, starting roll position and presence of visuospatial neglect when assessing perception of verticality after stroke?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Considering various factors that influence the accuracy of the Subjective Visual Vertical (SVV) and Subjective Postural Vertical (SPV), standardization of assessment methods is needed. This retrospective study examined the contribution of Head-on-Body (HOB) position, starting roll position (SRP) and visuospatial neglect (VSN) to SVV and SPV constant errors (i.e. deviation from true vertical). Also, the contribution of HOB position and VSN presence to SVV and SPV variability (i.e. intra-individual consistency between trials) was assessed.

METHODS

First-ever unilateral hemispheric stroke survivors (<85 years; <100 days post-stroke) were assessed with three HOB positions (neutral, contralesional, and ipsilesional) and seven starting positions (20°Contralesional to 20° ipsilesional) of the laser bar and tilt chair. Linear mixed models were selected to evaluate the contribution of HOB, SRP, and VSN to SVV/SPV constant errors and variability.

RESULTS

Thirty-four subjects (24 VSN-/10 VSN+) were assessed. A tilted HOB position led to significantly higher constant errors for the SVV and SPV (the latter only in the VSN- group), and an increased SVV variability. SRP only significantly contributed to the SVV constant errors and only in the VSN- group. Furthermore, the presence of VSN resulted in a significantly higher SVV and SPV variability.

CONCLUSIONS

HOB position and the presence of SRP and VSN are important factors to consider during SVV and SPV measurements. Assessment with a neutral HOB position leads to more accurate results. HOB position and SRP influence the results of SVV and SPV differently in individuals with and without VSN, which highlights the relevance of VSN assessment.

Lateropulsion with active pushing in stroke patients: its link with lesion location and the perception of verticality. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lateropulsion with active Pushing (LwP) is characterized by impairments in postural control. Previous research suggests an association between LwP, lesion location and verticality misperception. This first-ever systematic review evaluates the association between LwP, lesion location and the perception of verticality (PROSPERO: CRD42020159248).

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, REHABDATA, Embase, Cochrane Library and PEDro were systematically searched on December 16, 2021. Studies were included when examining lesion location or perception of verticality (Subjective Haptic, Visual or Postural Vertical) in supratentorial stroke patients showing LwP. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Data were qualitatively analyzed and extracted.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included, examining a total of 340 LwP patients. Lesions in: the thalamus, internal capsule, inferior parietal lobule at the junction of the postcentral gyrus, the posterior insula and the superior temporal gyrus, were associated with LwP. Whereas all studies examining the Subjective Postural and Haptic Vertical (haptic only examined once) reported a significant increased deviation in LwP patients, inconsistent results were found for the Subjective Visual Vertical. Furthermore, the Subjective Visual and Postural Vertical showed inconsistent results for magnitude, direction and variability of this deviation.

DISCUSSION

A complex brain network, rather than only one brain region, seems responsible for body control with respect to gravity. A disruption within this network might lead to a bias in the construction of a correct internal reference frame, crucial for perceiving verticality. There was an association of LwP with verticality misperception in all three modalities.

Comparison of two methods based on one psychophysical paradigm to measure the subjective postural vertical in standing

The perception of verticality can be altered with age or due to neurological diseases. Different procedures have been described to measure the subjective postural vertical (SPV). A deviation from the earth vertical was either described as a single position or as a sector defined by two positions representing the edges of the perceived verticality. In this study, for the first time, we investigated if these two methods produce equal values, and consequently can be merged to set normative values. SPV in standing was tested in 24 healthy young adults (28.4 (5.2) years of age, 12 women). Each participant performed both methods in the sagittal and the frontal plane. Absolute and constant error values were found to be similar for both methods in both planes with a mean difference of less than 0.3° (p > 0.148). The mean width of the SPV sector was 3.9° (0.9°) in the sagittal and 3.7° (1.4°) in the frontal plane, ranging in the mean from -5.5° to 8.1° in the sagittal and -5.3° to 4.3° in the frontal plane. SPV values significantly differed in range between both methods in both planes with a mean difference of more than 3.1° (p<0.002). Results show that both methods, SPVposition and SPVsector, produce equal error values when applied with otherwise similar methodological settings and can therefore be used alternatively or within the same meta-analysis. The SPVsector, however, led to wider range values and was less frequently rated as the preferred method to represent the participants' subjective verticality.

Starting position effects in the measurement of the postural vertical for pusher behavior

Pusher behavior (PB) is a severe lateral postural disorder that involves a disturbed subjective postural vertical (SPV) in the frontal plane. SPV is measured by determining the mean value and standard deviation of several trials beginning on both the contralesional- and ipsilesional-tilted positions. However, the postural representation, when passively tilted to the contralesional versus ipsilesional position, is different between patients with and without PB. Therefore, we hypothesized that SPV dependence on the starting position will be influenced by PB. For 53 patients with hemispheric stroke enrolled, SPV was measured using a non-motorized vertical board with eyes closed. The mean value (tilt direction) and standard deviation (variability) were calculated in four trials, each from two positions, with the patient tilted to the contralesional position (SPV-CL condition) and then to the ipsilesional position (SPV-IL condition). Patients were categorized into the non-pusher (n = 29) and pusher (n = 24) groups. In the SPV-CL trials, the tilt direction was significantly tilted contralesionally for the pusher group (- 6.3° ± 1.6°) compared with that for the non-pusher group (- 2.2° ± 1.8°; p < 0.001), with no significant difference in variability between the groups. In the SPV-IL trials, the tilt direction was not significantly different between the groups, but the variability was significantly higher in the pusher group (4.8° ± 2.0°) than in the non-pusher group (2.2° ± 1.3°; p < 0.001). The dependence of tilt direction and variability of SPV on the starting position in patients with PB differed from those noted in patients without PB. These results may help explain this abnormal posture and optimize neurological rehabilitation strategies for PB.

Use of Commercial Virtual Reality Technology to Assess Verticality Perception in Static and Dynamic Visual Backgrounds

OBJECTIVES

The Subjective Visual Vertical (SVV) test and the closely related Rod and Disk Test (RDT) are measures of perceived verticality measured in static and dynamic visual backgrounds. However, the equipment used for these tests is variable across clinics and is often too expensive or too primitive to be appropriate for widespread use. Commercial virtual reality technology, which is now widely available, may provide a more suitable alternative for collecting these measures in clinical populations. This study was designed to investigate verticality perception in symptomatic patients using a modified RDT paradigm administered through a head-mounted display (HMD).

DESIGN

A group of adult patients referred by a physician for vestibular testing based on the presence of dizziness symptoms and a group of healthy adults without dizziness symptoms were included. We investigated degree of visual dependence in both groups by measuring SVV as a function of kinematic changes to the visual background.

RESULTS

When a dynamic background was introduced into the HMD to simulate the RDT, significantly greater shifts in SVV were found for the patient population than for the control population. In patients referred for vestibular testing, the SVV measured with the HMD was significantly correlated with traditional measures of SVV collected in a rotary chair when accounting for head tilt.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides initial proof of concept evidence that reliable SVV measures in static and dynamic visual backgrounds can be obtained using a low-cost commercial HMD system. This initial evidence also suggests that this tool can distinguish individuals with dizziness symptomatology based on SVV performance in dynamic visual backgrounds.

Normative data for human postural vertical: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Perception of verticality is required for normal daily function, yet the typical human detection error range has not been well characterized. Vertical misperception has been correlated with poor postural control and functionality in patients after stroke and after vestibular disorders. Until now, all the published studies that assessed Subjective Postural Vertical (SPV) in the seated position used small groups to establish a reference value. However, this sample size does not represent the healthy population for comparison with conditions resulting in pathological vertical. Therefore, the primary objective was to conduct a systematic review with meta-analyses of Subjective Postural Vertical (SPV) data in seated position in healthy adults to establish the reference value with a representative sample. The secondary objective was to investigate the methodological characteristics of different assessment protocols of SPV described in the literature. A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane libraries. Mean and standard deviation of SPV in frontal and sagittal planes were considered as effect size measures. Sixteen of 129 identified studies met eligibility criteria for our systematic review (n = 337 subjects in the frontal plane; n = 187 subjects in sagittal plane). The meta-analyses measure was estimated using the pooled mean as the estimator and its respective error. Mean reference values were 0.12°±1.49° for the frontal plane and 0.02°±1.82° for the sagittal plane. There was a small variability of the results and this systematic review resulted in representative values for SPV. The critical analysis of the studies and observed homogeneity in the sample suggests that the methodological differences used in the studies did not influence SPV assessment of directional bias in healthy subjects. These data can serve as a reference for clinical studies in disorders of verticality.

Sensory information and the perception of verticality in post-stroke patients. Another point of view in sensory reweighting strategies

INTRODUCTION

Perception of verticality is highly related to balance control in human. Head-on-body tilt <60° results in the E-effect, meaning that a tilt of the perceived vertical is observed contralateral to the head tilt in the frontal plane. Furthermore, somatosensory loss also impacts the accuracy of verticality perception. However, when several input sources are absent or biased, less options for sensory weighting and balance control occur. Therefore, this study aims to identify the E-effect and assess the effect of somatosensory loss on the extent of the E-effect.

METHODS

All patients with a first stroke admitted to a Belgian rehabilitation hospital were eligible for inclusion. Patients aged above 80 with other neurological and orthopaedic impairments as well as brainstem, cerebellar or multiple lesions were excluded. In addition, patients with visuospatial neglect and pusher behaviour were also excluded as this can affect verticality perception. The Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance (RASP), the Subjective Visual (SVV) and Subjective Postural (SPV) Vertical Test were administered.

RESULTS

In total, 37 patients were included in the analysis of which 24 patients completed both SVV and SPV assessment. Results show that the E-effect occurred in our sample of stroke survivors for both SVV and SPV. In addition, the presence of somatosensory loss will increase the E-effect in both SVV as SPV assessment. A significant difference in verticality perception was noted for both SVV and SPV between the group with no (SVV: 5.13°(6.92); SPV: 0.30°(1.85)) and highly severe (SVV: 10.54°(13.19); SPV: 5.96°(9.27)) sensory loss.

CONCLUSIONS

The E-effect occurs in stroke subjects and increases when patients experience somatosensory loss. This suggests that the lack of available afferent information impede estimation of verticality. Therefore, stroke survivors have fewer alternative input sources as a result of impairments, leading to fewer options about sensory reweighting strategies and balance recovery after perturbations.

Is perception of visual verticality intact in patients with idiopathic cervical dystonia?

Idiopathic cervical dystonia (CD) is a focal dystonia characterized by an abnormal tilted or twisted head position. This abnormal head position could lead to a distorted perception of the visual vertical and spatial orientation. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate whether the perception of the visual vertical is impaired in patients with CD. The subjective visual vertical test (SVV) was measured in 24 patients with CD and 30 controls. The SVV test is conducted in a completely darkened room. A laser bar is projected on an opposing white wall, which is deviated from the earth's gravitational vertical. Participants were seated with their head unrestrained and were instructed to position this bar vertically. The deviations in degrees (°) are corrected for the side of laterocollis in order to measure the E-effect. We found that patients were able to position the laser bar as equally close to the earth's gravitational vertical as controls (+ 0.67° SD ± 2.12 vs + 0.29° SD ± 1.08, p = 0.43). No E-effect was measured. Notwithstanding the abnormal position of the head, the perception of the visual vertical in patients with idiopathic CD is intact, possibly because of central neural compensatory mechanisms.

Perception of Upright: Multisensory Convergence and the Role of Temporo-Parietal Cortex

We inherently maintain a stable perception of the world despite frequent changes in the head, eye, and body positions. Such "orientation constancy" is a prerequisite for coherent spatial perception and sensorimotor planning. As a multimodal sensory reference, perception of upright represents neural processes that subserve orientation constancy through integration of sensory information encoding the eye, head, and body positions. Although perception of upright is distinct from perception of body orientation, they share similar neural substrates within the cerebral cortical networks involved in perception of spatial orientation. These cortical networks, mainly within the temporo-parietal junction, are crucial for multisensory processing and integration that generate sensory reference frames for coherent perception of self-position and extrapersonal space transformations. In this review, we focus on these neural mechanisms and discuss (i) neurobehavioral aspects of orientation constancy, (ii) sensory models that address the neurophysiology underlying perception of upright, and (iii) the current evidence for the role of cerebral cortex in perception of upright and orientation constancy, including findings from the neurological disorders that affect cortical function.

Perceived direction of gravity and the body-axis during static whole body roll-tilt in healthy subjects

OBJECTIVE

We used the subjective visual vertical (SVV) and two different subjective visual body axis (SVBA) methods to quantify roll-tilt perception under gravity, and investigated the characteristics of these methods during static roll-tilt. In addition, we independently developed a compact device to facilitate evaluation of SVBA in different gravitational environments.

METHODS

Ten male volunteers participated in this study. We created a roll-tilt environment using a flight simulator in a dark room. The cockpit of the simulator was tilted leftward or rightward (-30°, -20°, -10°, 0°, 10°, 20° and 30°) in each randomly ordered trial. We quantified roll-tilt perception such that the experiment was conducted under 21 different conditions per participant.

RESULTS

We found no significant differences among the SVV error and the two types of SVBA error.

CONCLUSIONS

The SVV and the SVBA methods may be useful for evaluating subjective roll-tilt perception.

Visual effects on the subjective visual vertical and subjective postural head vertical during static roll-tilt

OBJECTIVES

Tilt perception is part of the perception of spatial orientation. It is determined not only by the allocentric gravity axis, but also by a second allocentric axis induced by visual information as well as by the egocentric body (head) axis induced by somatosensory information. The aim of this study was to quantify roll-tilt perception using the subjective visual vertical (SVV) and the newly developed subjective postural head vertical (SPHV) and to investigate the visual effects on both during static roll-tilt.

STUDY DESIGN

Basic science.

METHODS

Nine male volunteers participated in this study. A flight simulator was used to create several roll-tilt environments that were then combined with visual information. SVV and SPHV were evaluated in healthy participants during static roll-tilt.

RESULTS

The SVV evaluation revealed significant differences between the dark condition (control) and other visual conditions with respect to some of the body roll-tilt environments, and between a body roll-tilt of 0° and ≥ 20°. The SPHV evaluation revealed a significant difference between the dark condition and the visual condition that was always roll-tilted 20° to the right of the body axis. However, there were no significant differences in SPHV error between a body roll-tilt of 0° and other tilt angles for every visual condition, unlike SVV error.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that human susceptibility to spatial disorientation is dependent on roll-tilt angle and visual information. They also suggest that the SPHV is not affected by roll-tilt angle, and thus differs from SVV.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA.

Visual perception of upright: Head tilt, visual errors and viewing eye

BACKGROUND

Perception of upright is often assessed by aligning a luminous line to the subjective visual vertical (SVV).

OBJECTIVE

Here we investigated the effects of visual line rotation and viewing eye on SVV responses and whether there was any change with head tilt.

METHODS

SVV was measured using a forced-choice paradigm and by combining the following conditions in 22 healthy subjects: head position (20° left tilt, upright and 20° right tilt), viewing eye (left eye, both eyes and right eye) and direction of visual line rotation (clockwise [CW] and counter clockwise [CCW]).

RESULTS

The accuracy and precision of SVV responses were not different between the viewing eye conditions in all head positions (P> 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test). The accuracy of SVV responses was % significantly different between the CW and CCW line rotations (p ≈ 0.0001; Kruskal-Wallis test) and SVV was tilted in the same direction as the line rotation. This effect of line rotation was however not consistent across head tilts and was only present in the upright and right tilt head positions. The accuracy of SVV responses showed a higher variability among subjects in the left head tilt position with no significant difference between the CW and CCW line rotations (P> 0.05; post-hoc Dunn's test).

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the challenges to the estimate of upright with head tilt, normal subjects did remarkably well irrespective of the viewing eye. The physiological significance of the asymmetry in the effect of line rotation between the head tilt positions is unclear but it %may suggest suggests a lateralizing effect of head tilt on the visual perception of upright.

Software for subjective visual vertical assessment: an observational cross-sectional study

Spatial orientation in relation to the gravitational axis is significantly important for the maintenance of the posture, gait and for most of the human's motor activities. The subjective visual vertical exam evaluates the individual's perception of vertical orientation.

Objectives

The aims of this study were (1) to develop a virtual system to evaluate the subjective visual vertical exam, (2) to provide a simple tool to clinical practice and (3) to assess the subjective visual vertical values of h ealthy subjects using the new software. Study Design: observational cross-sectional study.

Methods

Thirty healthy volunteers performed the subjective visual vertical exam in both static and dynamic conditions. The exam consisted in adjusting a virtual line in the vertical position using the computer mouse. For the static condition, the virtual line was projected in a white background. For the dynamic condition, black circles rotated in clockwise or counterclockwise directions. Six measurements were taken and the mean deviations in relation to the real vertical calculated.

Results

The mean values of subjective visual vertical measurements were: static −0.372°; ± 1.21; dynamic clockwise 1.53° ± 1.80 and dynamic counterclockwise −1.11° ± 2.46.

Conclusion

This software showed to be practical and accurate to be used in clinical routines.

A new method to analyze the subjective visual vertical in patients with bilateral vestibular dysfunction

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the subjective visual vertical in patients with bilateral vestibular dysfunction and to propose a new method to analyze subjective visual vertical data in these patients.

METHODS

Static subjective visual vertical tests were performed in 40 subjects split into two groups. Group A consisted of 20 healthy volunteers, and Group B consisted of 20 patients with bilateral vestibular dysfunction. Each patient performed six measurements of the subjective visual vertical test, and the mean values were calculated and analyzed.

RESULTS

Analyses of the numerical values of subjective visual vertical deviations (the conventional method of analysis) showed that the mean deviation was 0.326±1.13º in Group A and 0.301±1.87º in Group B. However, by analyzing the absolute values of the subjective visual vertical (the new method of analysis proposed), the mean deviation became 1.35±0.48º in Group A and 2.152±0.93º in Group B. The difference in subjective visual vertical deviations between groups was statistically significant (p<0.05) only when the absolute values and the range of deviations were considered.

CONCLUSION

An analysis of the absolute values of the subjective visual vertical more accurately reflected the visual vertical misperception in patients with bilateral vestibular dysfunction.

The use of a neck brace does not influence visual vertical perception

Subjective visual vertical (SVV) evaluates the individual's capacity to determine the vertical orientation. Using a neck brace (NB) allow volunteers' heads fixation to reduce cephalic tilt during the exam, preventing compensatory ocular torsion and erroneous influence on SVV result. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the influence of somatosensory inputs caused by a NB on the SVV. METHOD: Thirty healthy volunteers performed static and dynamic SVV: six measures with and six without the NB. RESULTS: The mean values for static SVV were -0.075º±1.15º without NB and -0.372º±1.21º with NB. For dynamic SVV in clockwise direction were 1.73º±2.31º without NB and 1.53º±1.80º with NB. For dynamic SVV in counterclockwise direction was -1.50º±2.44º without NB and -1.11º±2.46º with NB. Differences between measurements with and without the NB were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Although the neck has many sensory receptors, the use of a NB does not provide sufficient afferent input to change healthy subjects' perception of visual verticality.