Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials and habituation to seasickness

Effects of dynamic visual feedback system on seasickness

Motion sickness (MS) poses challenges for individuals affected, hindering their activities and travel. This study investigates the effect of a visual dynamic device, forming an artificial horizon plane, on symptoms and physiological changes induced by MS. This device consists of vertical light-emitting diodes whose illumination varies according to the boat's movements. Fifteen subjects with moderate-to-severe MS susceptibility were exposed to a seasickness simulator with and without the device. Symptoms were assessed immediately after exposure. Time spent in the simulator, heart rate, and temperature were also recorded. Symptom intensity at the end of the experience did not differ, but the time spent in the simulator was significantly longer with the device (+46%). Variations in heart rate were also observed. The device delays symptom onset and can be used as a tool against MS. Further research is needed to evaluate its effects, for example, during more prolonged exposure to MS-inducing stimuli.

Investigation of Pathogenesis and Otolithic Organ Responses in Sailors with Seasickness Using cVEMP

There are different theories cited as the cause of Motion Sickness. Asymmetrical otolithic organ function is one of the etiology theories of motion sickness. In our study, the aim was to reveal whether there is a cause originating from the sacculocolic reflex pathway in the physiopathology of seasickness. The patient group included 15 man sailors with diagnosis of seasickness and the control group included 15 man sailors without seasickness in our study. Cervical evoked myogenic vestibular potential (cVEMP) findings were compared between the groups. In the right and left ears of sailors with seasickness, the mean latencies of the p13 and n23 waves at 100, 95, and 90 dB normal hearing level (nHL) levels were found significantly shorter than in the control group (p < 0.05, for all). In the seasickness group, cVEMP interaural wave amplitude asymmetry ratio at 100 nHL level were found significantly higher than the control group (p = 0.001). The findings of our study indicated that there may be reasons arising rom the sacculocolic reflex pathway in the pathophysiology of seasickness.

Antihistamines for motion sickness

BACKGROUND

Motion sickness is a syndrome that occurs as a result of passive body movement in response to actual motion, or the illusion of motion when exposed to virtual and moving visual environments. The most common symptoms are nausea and vomiting. Antihistamines have been used in the management of motion sickness for decades, however studies have shown conflicting results regarding their efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of antihistamines in the prevention and treatment of motion sickness in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 7 December 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in susceptible adults and children in whom motion sickness was induced under natural conditions such as air, sea and land transportation. We also included studies in which motion sickness was induced under experimental conditions (analysed separately). Antihistamines were included regardless of class, route or dosage and compared to no treatment, placebo or any other pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1) the proportion of susceptible participants who did not experience any motion sickness symptoms; 2) the proportion of susceptible participants who experienced a reduction or resolution of existing symptoms. Secondary outcomes were 1) physiological measures (heart rate, core temperature and gastric tachyarrhythmia (electrogastrography)) and 2) adverse effects (sedation, impaired cognition, blurred vision). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs (658 participants). Studies were conducted across seven countries, with an overall age range of 16 to 55 years. Motion sickness was induced naturally in six studies and experimentally in four studies (rotating chair). All the naturally induced studies only evaluated first-generation antihistamines (cinnarizine and dimenhydrinate). Risk of bias across the studies varied, with mostly low risk for random sequence generation and allocation concealment, and mostly high risk for selective reporting. Only the experimentally induced studies measured physiological parameters and only the naturally induced studies evaluated adverse effects. There were no studies that clearly assessed the paediatric population. Antihistamines versus placebo or no treatment Antihistamines are probably more effective than placebo at preventing motion sickness symptoms under natural conditions (symptoms prevented: 25% placebo; 40% antihistamines) (risk ratio (RR) 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 2.66; 3 studies; 240 participants) (moderate-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on preventing motion sickness under experimental conditions (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.32, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.83; 2 studies; 62 participants) (very low-certainty). No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia under experimental conditions (mean difference (MD) -2.2, 95% CI -11.71 to 7.31; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. When compared to placebo, antihistamines may be more likely to cause sedation (sedation: 44% placebo; 66% antihistamines) (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.02; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty); they may result in little or no difference in blurred vision (blurred vision: 12.5% placebo; 14% antihistamines) (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.48; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty); and they may result in little or no difference in terms of impaired cognition (impaired cognition: 33% placebo; 29% antihistamines) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.38; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty). Antihistamines versus scopolamine The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on preventing motion sickness under natural conditions when compared to scopolamine (symptoms prevented: 81% scopolamine; 71% antihistamines) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.16; 2 studies; 71 participants) (very low-certainty). No studies were performed under experimental conditions. No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on heart rate under natural conditions (narrative report, 1 study; 20 participants; "No difference in pulse frequency"; very low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. When compared to scopolamine, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on sedation (sedation: 21% scopolamine; 30% antihistamines) (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.07 to 9.25; 2 studies; 90 participants) (very low-certainty) and on blurred vision (narrative report: not a significant difference; 1 study; 51 participants; very low-certainty). No studies evaluated impaired cognition. Antihistamines versus antiemetics Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in the prevention of motion sickness under experimental conditions (MD -0.20, 95% CI -10.91 to 10.51; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). The evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision as the sample size is small and the confidence interval crosses the line of no effect. No studies assessed the effects of antihistamines versus antiemetics under natural conditions. No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia (MD 4.56, 95% CI -3.49 to 12.61; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. No studies evaluated sedation, impaired cognition or blurred vision. One study reported physiological data for this outcome, evaluating gastric tachyarrhythmia specifically. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia (MD 4.56, 95% CI -3.49 to 12.61; 1 study; 42 participants; low-certainty evidence). This evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision as the sample size is small and the confidence interval crosses the line of no effect. Antihistamines versus acupuncture The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of antihistamines on the prevention of motion sickness under experimental conditions when compared to acupuncture (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.57; 1 study; 100 participants) (very low-certainty). This study did not assess the prevention of motion sickness under natural conditions, nor the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. There was no study performed under natural conditions. Physiological measures and adverse effects were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is probably a reduction in the risk of developing motion sickness symptoms under naturally occurring conditions of motion when using first-generation antihistamines, in motion sickness-susceptible adults, compared to placebo. Antihistamines may be more likely to cause sedation when compared to placebo. No studies evaluated the treatment of existing motion sickness, and there are few data on the effect of antihistamines in children. The evidence for all other outcomes and comparisons (versus scopolamine, antiemetics and acupuncture) was of low or very low certainty and we are therefore uncertain about these effects of antihistamines.

Assessment of Sea Sickness in Naval Personnel: Incidence and Management

Background:

Strategic, operational and tactical superiority of Navy hinges on extremely efficient warships which in turn depend on professionally competent sailors ready to undertake tasks to deliver timely, structured and metered response. Ships and their potentialities are tools to achieve the required strategic advantage which is dependent on the proficiency of sailors. Sailors who are fit ashore may be debilitated on board because of sea sickness.

Aims:

To study the incidence and severity of sea sickness among 500 naval personnel from various ships. Setting and design: An observational study conducted from May 2019 to March 2020 among 500 naval personnel from various ships of the fleet.

Materials and Methods:

Motion Sickness Assessment Questionnaire (MSAQ) was used to collect data from personnel of different departments working in different part of ship aged between 20 to 50 years.

Results:

The majority suffered mild symptoms (78.78%) and did not require any medication. Their symptoms were selflimiting and settled on rest within 24 hours. Moderately severe symptoms were observed among 19.31 % personnel and had to be administered medication and rest for 24 hours. Only 1.91% had severe symptoms and had to be excused from duties along with medication and rest.

Conclusion:

Sea sickness is unpleasant and has an adverse effect on employability of the sailors. It is mild and self limiting in majority of the personnel not requiring active intervention. Some personnel may require desensitisation along with pharmacotherapy.

Motion sickness diagnostic criteria: Consensus document of the classification committee of the Bárány society

We present diagnostic criteria for motion sickness, visually induced motion sickness (VIMS), motion sickness disorder (MSD), and VIMS disorder (VIMSD) to be included in the International Classification of Vestibular Disorders. Motion sickness and VIMS are normal physiological responses that can be elicited in almost all people, but susceptibility and severity can be high enough for the response to be considered a disorder in some cases. This report provides guidelines for evaluating signs and symptoms caused by physical motion or visual motion and for diagnosing an individual as having a response that is severe enough to constitute a disorder.

   The diagnostic criteria for motion sickness and VIMS include adverse reactions elicited during exposure to physical motion or visual motion leading to observable signs or symptoms of greater than minimal severity in the following domains: nausea and/or gastrointestinal disturbance, thermoregulatory disruption, alterations in arousal, dizziness and/or vertigo, headache and/or ocular strain. These signs and/or symptoms occur during the motion exposure, build as the exposure is prolonged, and eventually stop after the motion ends. Motion sickness disorder and VIMSD are diagnosed when recurrent episodes of motion sickness or VIMS are reliably triggered by the same or similar stimuli, severity does not significantly decrease after repeated exposure, and signs/symptoms lead to activity modification, avoidance behavior, or aversive emotional responses.

   Motion sickness/MSD and VIMS/VIMSD can occur separately or together. Severity of symptoms in reaction to physical motion or visual motion stimuli varies widely and can change within an individual due to aging, adaptation, and comorbid disorders. We discuss the main methods for measuring motion sickness symptoms, the situations conducive to motion sickness and VIMS, and the individual traits associated with increased susceptibility. These additional considerations will improve diagnosis by fostering accurate measurement and understanding of the situational and personal factors associated with MSD and VIMSD.

Routine Vestibular Tests May Point Out Vestibular Subtype of Seasickness Only

BACKGROUND: The vestibular system is important in the pathogenesis of seasickness. Our objective is to investigate whether routine vestibular tests detect seasickness.METHODS: Included were 17 professional naval personnel (mean age of 29.76 4.73 yr) diagnosed as having seasickness and 29 healthy age- and gender-matched controls. Cervical (c) vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (VEMP) and ocular (o) VEMP and bithermal caloric tests were performed after ear, nose, and throat examination, pure tone audiometry, and magnetic resonance imaging. Severity of seasickness was evaluated based on the Graybiel scale. P1 latency, N1 latency, P1N1 amplitude, and interaural asymmetry ratios (IAR) of cVEMP and oVEMP were compared between the patients and control groups. Abnormal findings in the caloric test were noted. Presence of an abnormality in any of the three vestibular tests (cVEMP, oVEMP, or caloric test) was accepted as a positive vestibular finding.RESULTS: According to the Graybiel Scale, severe malaise and frank sickness were observed in 3 patients (18.7%) and 13 patients (81.3%), respectively. Graybiel scoring could not be performed in one patient due to general discomfort and bad general condition. In the caloric test, each of three patients (17.65%) showed canal paresis, an incomplete test because of severe nausea, and vomiting and hyperactive response. There were no significant differences in P1 latency, N1 latency, P1N1 amplitude, or IAR of cVEMP and oVEMP (P > 0.05). There were three patients (17.65%) and two patients (11.76%) who had abnormal IAR for cVEMP and oVEMP, respectively.CONCLUSION: Routine vestibular tests may detect some findings in only a minority of patients with seasickness.Satar B, Akin Ocal FC, Karacayli C, Coban VK. Routine vestibular tests may point out vestibular subtype of seasickness only. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2020; 91(11):852860.

Functional Integrity of the Inferior Vestibular Nerve and Posterior Canal BPPV

The functional integrity of the inferior vestibular nerve (IVN) may be evaluated by the cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP) response, which requires signal transmission via the nerve. As functional integrity of the IVN innervating the posterior semicircular canal is required to produce the typical positioning vertigo and nystagmus characterizing posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (PCBPPV), we hypothesized that normal cVEMPs would be found in most PCBPPV patients. Twenty-four PCBPPV patients participated in a prospective cohort study. All were treated by canal repositioning maneuver and had air-conduction cVEMP and videonystagmography (VNG). Follow-up evaluations including history and otoneurological bedside examination were carried out 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the initial treatment. At the last follow-up, the patients filled the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) questionnaire. Normal cVEMPs were recorded in 19 (79%) and were absent in 5 (21%) of the subjects. The average DHI in the patients with normal cVEMP was 16.42 ± 17.99 vs. 0.4 ± 0.89 among those with pathological cVEMP (p < 0.04, Mann-Whitney test). Thirteen (54%) patients experienced recurrent PCBPPV (rPCBPPV). The average DHI score was significantly higher among patients having recurrence (22.15 ± 18.61) when compared to those with complete cure (2.36 ± 5.98; p < 0.003, Mann-Whitney test). Ten (77%) of the subjects with rPCBPPV had normal and 3 (23%) had pathological cVEMP as compared to 9 (82%) and 2 (18%) subjects in the non-recurrent (nrPCBPPV) group (Fisher's exact test-not significant). cVEMP p13 and n23 wave latencies and amplitudes, inter-aural differences in p13-n23 peak-to-peak amplitudes, and response thresholds did not differ between the groups. No differences were found between the rPCBBPV and nrPCBBPV groups in VNG caloric lateralization and directional preponderance values. We have found that in most cases, PCBPPV symptoms and signs are associated with normal cVEMP response supporting the role of IVN functional integrity. The absent cVEMPs in the minority of patients, although having similar clinical presentation, raise the possibility that the ipsilateral saccule is affected by the same pathology causing degeneration of the utricle macula. Alternatively, lacking inhibitory stimuli from the involved ipsilateral utricle or partial degeneration of the IVN and ganglion could explain the diminished cVEMP response. Clinical Trial Registration: The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov Internet site (study ID-NCT01004913; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01004913?cond=BPPV&cntry=IL&draw=2&rank=3).

Motion sickness: an overview

Background

Motion sickness is a common phenomenon that affects almost everybody at some point in their lifetime. Clinicians should be familiar with the proper management of this condition.

Objective

To provide an update on the current understanding of the pathophysiology and management of motion sickness.

Methods

A PubMed search was performed with Clinical Queries using the key term ‘motion sickness.’ The search strategy included meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, observational studies, and reviews. The search was restricted to English literature. The information retrieved from the earlier search was used in the compilation of the present article.

Results

Motion sickness is typically triggered by low-frequency vertical, lateral, angular, rotary motion, or virtual stimulator motion, to which an individual has not adapted. Sine qua non for developing motion sickness is when the brain receives conflicting information from different sensors about real body movements or virtual environment. The principal sensors are the eyes, the vestibular apparatus, and proprioceptive receptors. The conflicting information is judged in relation to a pattern of expected associations formed under normal or experienced conditions stored in the brain. Motion sickness typically presents with malaise, anorexia, nausea, yawning, sighing, increased salivation, burping, headache, blurred vision, non-vertiginous dizziness, drowsiness, spatial disorientation, difficulty concentrating, and sometimes vomiting. Simple behavioral and environmental modifications can be effective in the prevention of motion sickness. Medications that are effective in the prophylaxis and/or treatment of motion sickness include anticholinergics, antihistamines, and sympathomimetics.

Conclusion

In most cases, motion sickness can be prevented by behavioral and environmental modifications (avoidance, habituation, and minimization of motion stimuli). Pharmacotherapy should be considered in the prevention and/or treatment of more severe motion sickness and for patients who do not respond to conservative measures. Medications are most effective when combined with behavioral and environmental modifications. Drugs that are effective in the prophylaxis and/or treatment of motion sickness include anticholinergic agents and antihistamines.

Vection in virtual reality modulates vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials

The popularity of virtual reality (VR) has increased rapidly in recent years. While significant technological advancements are apparent, a troublesome problem with VR is that between 20% and 80% of users will experience unpleasant side effects such as nausea, disorientation, blurred vision and headaches-a malady known as Cybersickness. Cybersickness may be caused by a conflict between sensory signals for self-motion: while vision signals that the user is moving in a certain direction with certain acceleration, the vestibular organs provide no corroborating information. To resolve the sensory conflict, vestibular cues may be down-weighted leading to an alteration of how the brain interprets actual vestibular information. This may account for the frequently reported after-effects of VR exposure. Here, we investigated whether exposure to vection in VR modulates vestibular processing. We measured vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs) during brief immersion in a vection-inducing VR environment presented via head-mounted display. We found changes in VEMP asymmetry ratio, with a substantial increase in VEMP amplitude recorded on the left sternocleidomastoid muscle following just one minute of exposure to vection in VR. Our results suggest that exposure to vection in VR modulates vestibular processing, which may explain common after-effects of VR.

The Neurophysiology and Treatment of Motion Sickness

BACKGROUND

Seasickness and travel sickness are classic types of motion illness. Modern simulation systems and virtual reality representations can also induce comparable symptoms. Such manifestations can be alleviated or prevented by various measures.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a PubMed search, with special attention to clinical trials and review articles.

RESULTS

Individuals vary in their susceptibility to autonomic symptoms, ranging from fatigue to massive vomiting, induced by passive movement at relatively low frequencies (0.2 to 0.4 Hz) in situations without any visual reference to the horizontal plane. Younger persons and women are considered more susceptible, and twin studies have revealed a genetic component as well. The various types of motion sickness are adequately explained by the intersensory conflict model, incorporating the vestibular, visual, and proprioceptive systems and extended to include consideration of postural instability and asymmetry of the otolith organs. Scopolamine and H1-antihistamines, such as dimenhydrinate and cinnarizine, can be used as pharmacotherapy. The symptoms can also be alleviated by habituation through long exposure or by the diminution of vestibular stimuli.

CONCLUSION

The various types of motion sickness can be treated with general measures to lessen the intersensory conflict, behavioral changes, and drugs.

Effects of motion sickness severity on the vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials

BACKGROUND

Motion sickness is a common debilitating condition associated with both actual and perceived motion. Despite the commonality, little is known about the underlying physiological mechanisms. One theory proposes that motion sickness arises from a mismatch between reality and past experience in vertical motions. Physiological tests of the vestibular system, however, have been inconclusive regarding the underlying pathogenesis. Cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMPs) arise from the saccule, which responds to vertical motion. If vertical motion elicits motion sickness, the cVEMP should be affected.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this investigation was to determine if cVEMP characteristics differ among individuals with a range of motion sickness susceptibility from negligible to severe. The hypothesis was that individuals with high susceptibility would have larger cVEMP amplitudes and shorter cVEMP latencies relative to those who are resistant to motion sickness.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The study had two parts. The first was quasi-experimental in which participants comprised three groups based on susceptibility to motion sickness (low, mild-moderate, high) as identified on the short version of the Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire (MSSQ-S). The second part of the study was correlational and evaluated the specific relationships between the degree of motion sickness susceptibility and characteristics of the VEMPs.

STUDY SAMPLE

A total of 24 healthy young adults (ages 20-24 yr) were recruited from the university and the community without regard to motion sickness severity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Participants took the MSSQ-S, which quantifies susceptibility to motion sickness. The participants had a range of motion sickness susceptibility with MSSQ raw scores from 0.0-36.6, which correspond to percent susceptibility from 0.0-99.3%. VEMPs were elicited by 500 Hz tone-bursts monaurally in both ears at 120 dB pSPL. MSSQ-S percent scores were used to divide the participants into low, mild-moderate, and high susceptibility groups. A fixed general linear model with repeated-measures analysis of variance tested cVEMP characteristics for the susceptibility groups (between participants) and ears (within participants). A univariate analysis of variance tested the cVEMP interaural amplitudes across groups. The second analysis was a regression of the severity of motion sickness in percent on cVEMP characteristics. Significance was defined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Participants in the high susceptibility group had significantly higher cVEMP amplitudes than those in the low susceptibility group. cVEMP amplitudes did not differ between ears, and latencies did not differ between the two groups or between ears. Regression analysis on MSSQ-S percent susceptibility by VEMP amplitudes revealed a best-fit cubic function in both ears, with r(2) values of more than 42%. The interaural asymmetry ratio was negatively associated with motion sickness susceptibility (r(2) = 0.389).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study is the first to report that greater susceptibility to motion sickness is associated with larger cVEMP amplitudes and lower interaural cVEMP asymmetries. Larger interaural asymmetries in cVEMPs did not promote motion sickness susceptibility. The cVEMP findings implicate the saccule and its neural pathways in the production of motion sickness and are consistent with the theory that vertical motions elicit motion sickness. Motion sickness susceptibility may contribute to the variability in normative cVEMP amplitudes.

A period of immobility after remifentanil administration protects from nausea: an experimental randomized cross-over study

Background

The opioid remifentanil induces a decrease of vestibulo-ocular reflex function, which has been associated with nausea and vomiting when the subjects are moved. The study investigates in healthy female volunteers if immobility after remifentanil administration protects from nausea and vomiting.

Methods

In volunteers, a standardized movement intervention (a manually applied head-trunk movement forward, backward and sideward) was started 5 min (session A), 35 min (session B) or 60 min (session C) after cessation of a remifentanil infusion (0.15 μg · kg⁻¹ · min⁻¹). In a cross-over design, 16 participants were randomized to the early (sessions A and B) or the late intervention group (sessions A and C). Nausea was assessed using a 11-point numerical rating scale before and after each movement intervention. Differences within and between groups were assessed with non-parametric tests for paired and unpaired data.

Results

Comparing sessions A, B and C, intensity of nausea was time-dependent after cessation of remifentanil administration (p = 0.015). In the early intervention group, nausea decreased from median 5.0 [IQR 1.5;6.0] in session A to 2.0 [1.0;3.0] in session B (p = 0.094); in the late intervention group nausea decreased from 3.5 [2.0;5.0] in session A to 0.5 [0.0;2.0] in session C (p = 0.031).

Conclusions

In summary, in young healthy women, immobility after remifentanil administration protects from nausea and vomiting in a time-dependent manner. In analogy to motion sickness, opioid-induced nausea and vomiting in female volunteers can be triggered by movement.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00010667. The trial was registered retrospectively on June, 20th 2016.

Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials and motion sickness medications

OBJECTIVE

Seasickness is a widespread problem among naval crew, and has a major impact on their performance at sea. The three pharmacological agents most commonly employed in the treatment of seasickness are dimenhydrinate, cinnarizine, and scopolamine. At present, the effectiveness of anti-seasickness drugs is tested by a process of "trial and error", while sailing and exposed to sea conditions. A physiological test to evaluate the action of a drug might save crew members long periods of suffering, as well as simplifying the procedure of selecting the appropriate treatment for each individual. The cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMP) test has come to be recognized as a reliable procedure for the objective evaluation of saccular function. It was the hypothesis of the present study that cVEMP otolith responses may be affected by anti-motion sickness drugs, which might thus make cVEMP a useful clinical neurophysiological tool for the assessment of drug absorption and efficacy.

METHODS

Thirty male sailors who regularly took medication for the treatment of seasickness participated in the study. Participants underwent the cVEMP test pre- and 1h post-drug administration.

RESULTS

A statistically significant decrease in p13 latency was found after administration of scopolamine compared with baseline (14.46ms vs. 15.09ms, p=0.0049), with significant prolongation of the binaural average inter-latency in this group. No differences were found in the dimenhydrinate and cinnarizine study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that scopolamine absorption can be verified by changes in cVEMP latencies.

SIGNIFICANCE

The potential of the cVEMP test for predicting action of scopolamine on the vestibular system.

Motion sickness

Over 2000 years ago the Greek physician Hippocrates wrote, "sailing on the sea proves that motion disorders the body." Indeed, the word "nausea" derives from the Greek root word naus, hence "nautical," meaning a ship. The primary signs and symptoms of motion sickness are nausea and vomiting. Motion sickness can be provoked by a wide variety of transport environments, including land, sea, air, and space. The recent introduction of new visual technologies may expose more of the population to visually induced motion sickness. This chapter describes the signs and symptoms of motion sickness and different types of provocative stimuli. The "how" of motion sickness (i.e., the mechanism) is generally accepted to involve sensory conflict, for which the evidence is reviewed. New observations concern the identification of putative "sensory conflict" neurons and the underlying brain mechanisms. But what reason or purpose does motion sickness serve, if any? This is the "why" of motion sickness, which is analyzed from both evolutionary and nonfunctional maladaptive theoretic perspectives. Individual differences in susceptibility are great in the normal population and predictors are reviewed. Motion sickness susceptibility also varies dramatically between special groups of patients, including those with different types of vestibular disease and in migraineurs. Finally, the efficacy and relative advantages and disadvantages of various behavioral and pharmacologic countermeasures are evaluated.

Motion Sickness: Current Knowledge and Recent Advance

Motion sickness (MS) is a common physiological response to real or virtual motion. Numerous studies have investigated the neurobiological mechanism and the control measures of MS. This review summarizes the current knowledge about pathogenesis and pathophysiology, prediction, evaluation, and countermeasures of MS. The sensory conflict hypothesis is the most widely accepted theory for MS. Both the hippocampus and vestibular cortex might play a role in forming internal model. The pathophysiology focuses on the visceral afference, thermoregulation and MS-related neuroendocrine. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in some genes and epigenetic modulation might contribute to MS susceptibility and habituation. Questionnaires, heart rate variability (HRV) and electrogastrogram (EGG) are useful for diagnosing and evaluating MS. We also list MS medications to guide clinical practice. Repeated real motion exposure and combined visual-vestibular interaction training accelerate the progress of habituation. Behavioral and dietary countermeasures, as well as physiotherapy, are also effective in alleviating MS symptoms.

Pathophysiology and treatment of motion sickness

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Motion sickness remains bothersome in conventional transport and is an emerging hazard in visual information technologies. Treatment remains unsatisfactory but advances in brain imaging, neurophysiology, and neuropharmacology may provide insights into more effective drug and behavioural management. We review these major developments.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent progress has been in identifying brain mechanisms and loci associated with motion sickness and nausea per se. The techniques have included conventional neurophysiology, pathway mapping, and functional MRI, implicating multiple brain regions including cortex, brainstem, and cerebellum. Understanding of the environmental and behavioural conditions provocative of and protective against motion sickness and how vestibular disease may sensitize to motion sickness has increased. The problem of nauseogenic information technology has emerged as a target for research, motivated by its ubiquitous applications. Increased understanding of the neurophysiology and brain regions associated with motion sickness may provide for more effective medication in the future. However, the polysymptomatic nature of motion sickness, high interindividual variability, and the extensive brain regions involved may preclude a single, decisive treatment.

SUMMARY

Motion sickness is an emerging hazard in information technologies. Adaptation remains the most effective countermeasure together with established medications, notably scopolamine and antihistamines. Neuropharmacological investigations may provide more effective medication in the foreseeable future.