Winkler P, Aaker J, Barnes C, Cozine-Lehman J, Overy R, Ruettgers J, Swish S; Regis University, Denver, CO, United States. overy296@regis.edu.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the effectiveness of a moving visual stimulation to decrease imbalance and dizziness in individuals with visual motion sensitivity (VMS). Vestibular rehabilitation therapy (VRT) has been shown to be effective in 80-85% of patients who suffer from a vestibular injury (Shepard et al., 1993). The remaining 15-20% of individuals who do not respond to VRT may be members of a subgroup that experiences sensitivity to motion of the visual surround called visual motion sensitivity (VMS). These individuals have symptoms of dizziness, imbalance, vertigo, and nausea, as do those with more typical vestibular injuries; however they have additional symptoms triggered by motion in the visual environment, as opposed to head movement. Interventions for individuals with VMS in conventional therapy do not currently exist. SUBJECTS: Fifteen subjects diagnosed with peripheral or central vestibulopathy, ages 29 to 59 (x = 44.8, sd = 10.04) participated in this study. METHODS: Subjects were treated three times per week for three weeks. Each session consisted of exposure to a visually stimulating environment (optokinetic stimulation) for up to 10 minutes. Measurements of sway on force platform (AMTI analyzed through Biosoft™ software), the Dynamic Gait Index, SF-36 and a visual analog scale (VAS) for dizziness and nausea were completed at initial, final, and 1-month intervention follow-up. ANALYSIS: Analysis was performed with SPSS 11.5 macros. The study design was a quasi-experimental, repeated measures design. One group repeated measures ANOVA were used with p < .05. RESULTS: Significant differences were found in the DGI, 5-minute post intervention VAS, the overall average center of pressure (COP) anterior/posterior sway, the overall standard deviation of this COP in the anterior/posterior and medial/lateral direction, and the 95% area ellipse between initial and final intervention session. In addition, the initial DGI and VAS were significantly different from the 1-month follow-up measure. CONCLUSONS: The findings of this study indicate that subjects improved in balance and decreased their dizziness, as shown on sway measurements, DGI, and VAS. Data collected from subject interviews, and physical therapist and physician reports also indicate improvements in balance and decreases in dizziness following this intervention. Future studies might include the use of additional disease specific functional outcome tools such as the Dizziness Handicap Inventory to further confirm the benefits of this intervention strategy. Using visual moving stimulation therapy appears to be feasible and beneficial for individuals with VMS. FUNDING SOURCE: Regis University Student Research Funds.

Copyright 2004 by the American Physical Therapy Association

Reprint Information
Requests for reprints should be directed to the corresponding author of the article. Students and other academic customers may receive permission to reprint copyrighted material from Physical Therapy by contacting the Copyright Clearance Center Inc, 222 Rosewood Dr, Danvers, MA 01923. Similar inquiries by all others should be made to the APTA Editorial Office, Attn: Physical Therapy.