Skip to main content

Study of the effect of different body positions on ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials using air-conducted sound

Abstract

Objective

The tested hypothesis states that by manipulating body position, a differentiation in the optimum body position for ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP) testing could be obtained.

Patients and methods

The present study was conducted on 33 ears (33 healthy adult volunteers) with no age or sex limit or any ontological complaint in the audiology unit of Alexandria Main University Hospital. Pure-tone audiometry, tympanometry, and oVEMP testing were performed. Ocular VEMP was performed in four different positions – sitting, supine, right decubitus, and left decubitus positions. Ocular VEMP waveforms were analyzed regarding morphology, latency, amplitude, and threshold.

Results

(a) oVEMP was present in 90% of the studied cases. (b) The sitting position produced the shortest latencies. (c) The independent position provided the largest amplitude. (d) The dependent position elicited the highest thresholds.

Conclusion

Although the best position for oVEMP test could not be determined by the present study, the trends found support that the sitting position may be preferred for future oVEMP testing based on the short latencies produced in this position. On the other hand, high thresholds were obtained in the dependent (left decubitus) position, which indicates that it is the least favorable position.

References

  1. 1

    Akin FW, Murnane OD. Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials: preliminary report. J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12:445–452; quiz 91.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    O’Neil A. Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (oVEMP) using air conducted sound: effect of body position on threshold. Alexandria, Egypt: Washington University School of Medicine; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Curthoys IS, Vulovic V. Vestibular primary afferent responses to sound and vibration in the guinea pig. Exp Brain Res 2011; 210:347–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Curthoys IS, Vulovic V, Manzari L. Ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP) to test utricular function: neural and oculomotor evidence. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2012; 32:41–45.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Uchino Y, Kushiro K. Differences between otolith- and semicircular canal-activated neural circuitry in the vestibular system. Neurosci Res 2011; 71:315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Kantner C, Gurkov R. Characteristics and clinical applications of ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Hear Res 2012; 294:55–63.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Curthoys IS, Manzari L, Smulders YE, Burgess AM. A review of the scientific basis and practical application of a new test of utricular function – ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials to bone-conducted vibration. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2009; 29:179–186.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Sadler JH. The effects of body position and visual fixation on the vestibular evoked myogenic potential [dissertation/thesis]. Virginia: James Madison University; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Isaacson B, Murphy E, Cohen H. Does the method of sternocleidomastoid muscle activation affect the vestibular evoked myogenic potential response? J Vestib Res 2006; 16:187–191.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Pai RA, Bhat JS. Effect of body posture on vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. IJSR 2013; 2:396–398.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Kotz S, Balakrishnan N, Read CB, Vidakovic B. Encyclopedia of statistical sciences. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Kirkpatrick LA, Feeney BC. A simple guide to IBM SPSS statistics for version 20.0. Student ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Fernandez C, Goldberg JM, Abend WK. Response to static tilts of peripheral neurons innervating otolith organs of the squirrel monkey. J Neurophysiol 1972; 35:978–987.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Govender S, Rosengren SM, Colebatch JG. The effect of gaze direction on the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential produced by air-conducted sound. Clin Neurophysiol 2009; 120:1386–1391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Rosengren SM, Colebatch JG, Straumann D, Weber KP. Why do oVEMPs become larger when you look up? Explaining the effect of gaze elevation on the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential. Clin Neurophysiol 2013; 124:785–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Colebatch JG, Halmagyi GM, Skuse NF. Myogenic potentials generated by a click-evoked vestibulocollic reflex. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57:190–197.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Shojaku H, Watanabe Y, Tsubota M, Katayama N. Evaluation of the vestibular evoked myogenic potential during parabolic flight in humans. Exp Brain Res 2008; 187:477–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Taylor RL, Xing M, Black DA, Halmagyi GM, Welgampola MS. Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials: the effect of head and body tilt in the roll plane. Clin Neurophysiol 2014; 125: 627–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Iwasaki S, Chihara Y, Egami N, Fujimoto C, Murofushi T, Yamasoba T. Different effects of head tilt on ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials in response to bone-conducted vibration and air-conducted sound. Exp Brain Res 2012; 223:389–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Ito K, Karino S, Murofushi T. Effect of head position on vestibular evoked myogenic potentials with toneburst stimuli. Acta Otolaryngol 2007; 127:57–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Gurkov R, Kantner C. Modulation of oVEMP amplitudes by lateral head tilts. Clin Neurophysiol 2013; 124:1911–1912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nervana Salem MBBCH alex, M.Sc.

Additional information

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Asal, S., Sobhy, O. & Salem, N. Study of the effect of different body positions on ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials using air-conducted sound. Egypt J Otolaryngol 33, 588–593 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4103/ejo.ejo_20_17

Download citation

Keywords

  • air-conducted sound
  • otoconial membrane
  • otolith organs
  • ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential
  • utricule