The relationships between perception of verticality by different sensory modalities, lateropulsion and pushing behaviour and lesion location were investigated in 86 patients with a first stroke. Participants sat restrained in a drum-like framework facing along the axis of rotation. They gave estimates of their subjective postural vertical by signalling the point of feeling upright during slow drum rotation which tilted them rightwards-leftwards. The subjective visual vertical was indicated by setting a line to upright on a computer screen. The haptic vertical was assessed in darkness by manually setting a rod to the upright. Normal estimates ranged from -2.5 degrees to 2.5 degrees for visual vertical and postural vertical, and from -4.5 degrees to 4.5 degrees for haptic vertical. Of six patients with brainstem stroke and ipsilesional lateropulsion only one had an abnormal ipsilesional postural vertical tilt (6 degrees ); six had an ipsilesional visual vertical tilt (13 +/-.4 degrees ); two had ipsilesional haptic vertical tilts of 6 degrees . In 80 patients with a hemisphere stroke (35 with contralesional lateropulsion including 6 'pushers'), 34 had an abnormal contralesional postural vertical tilt (average -8.5 +/- 4.7 degrees ), 44 had contralesional visual vertical tilts (average -7 +/- 3.2 degrees ) and 26 patients had contralesional haptic vertical tilts (-7.8 +/- 2.8 degrees ); none had ipsilesional haptic vertical or postural vertical tilts. Twenty-one (26%) showed no tilt of any modality, 41 (52%) one or two abnormal modality(ies) and 18 (22%) a transmodal contralesional tilt (i.e. PV + VV + HV). Postural vertical was more tilted in right than in left hemisphere strokes and specifically biased by damage to neural circuits centred around the primary somatosensory cortex and thalamus. This shows that thalamo-parietal projections have a functional role in the processing of the somaesthetic graviceptive information. Tilts of the postural vertical were more closely related to postural disorders than tilts of the visual vertical. All patients with a transmodal tilt showed a severe lateropulsion and 17/18 a right hemisphere stroke. This indicates that the right hemisphere plays a key role in the elaboration of an internal model of verticality, and in the control of body orientation with respect to gravity. Patients with a 'pushing' behaviour showed a transmodal tilt of verticality perception and a severe postural vertical tilt. We suggest that pushing is a postural behaviour that leads patients to align their erect posture with an erroneous reference of verticality.

A clinical rating scale which measured the severity of tremor in 20 patients (12 with essential tremor and 8 with "dystonic" tremor) was assessed at specific anatomical sites for both inter and intrarater reliability using four raters. The scores obtained with the scale were compared with the results of upper limb accelerometry, an activity of daily living self-questionnaire and estimates of the tremor induced impairment in writing and drawing specimens. The results show that, for the purposes of routine assessment and therapeutic trials, a clinical rating scale can produce reliable results which are a more valid index of tremor induced disability than standard postural accelerometry.

Twenty index patients with hereditary essential tremor and their kindreds were studied to define the phenotype of this condition. Ninety-three first degree and 38 more distant relatives were examined; 53 definite and 18 possible secondary cases were identified. The age of tremor onset was bimodally distributed with a median at approximately 15 years. Segregation analysis indicated autosomal dominant inheritance and penetrance was virtually complete by the age of 65 years. There were no examples of the disease skipping a generation. Men and women were affected in equal proportions. About 50% of cases were alcohol responsive. In the majority of families alcohol responsiveness was either consistently present or did not occur, but in 20% of kindreds definite heterogeneity of responsiveness was encountered within each family. The typical phenotype was a mild symmetrical postural tremor of the upper limbs. Tremor of the legs, head, facial muscles, voice, jaw and tongue occurred but never in isolation and rest, task specific (e.g. primary writing tremor) and primary orthostatic tremors were not found. Head tremor was invariably mild and 75% was of a 'no-no' type. Dystonia (e.g. torticollis and writer's cramp) were not encountered, a finding which strongly suggests that many previous studies of 'essential tremor' were contaminated by cases of idiopathic or hereditary torsion dystonia. No association with Parkinson's disease was found but classical migraine occurred in approximately 26% of cases and co-segregated with tremor. The severity of arm tremor (assessed using a clinical rating scale and by scoring tremor in Archimedes spirals) and disability increased with advancing age and increasing tremor duration, but there was no correlation between age at tremor onset and either tremor severity or disability. Men and women were affected with equal severity. The sex of the affected parent had no influence on the severity of tremor or the degree of disability experienced by an affected child. Disability commenced in the second decade and progressively increased. All the index patients and 59% of the definite secondary cases had tremor induced disabilities. Eighty-five percent of index patients and 38% of secondary cases also reported some degree of social handicap. Twenty-five percent of index patients and 12% of secondary cases had been compelled to change jobs or retire. Biological fitness was normal.

Certain patients with balance disorders report a 'visual vertigo' in which their symptoms are provoked or aggravated by specific visual contexts (e.g. supermarkets, driving or movement of objects). In order to determine the causes of visual vertigo (VV), we assessed symptoms, anxiety and the influence of disorienting visual stimuli in 21 such patients. In 17 out of 21 patients, a peripheral vestibular disorder was diagnosed. Sixteen bilateral labyrinthine-defective subjects (LDS) and 25 normal subjects served as controls. Questionnaire assessment showed that the levels of trait anxiety and childhood motion sickness in the three subject groups were not significantly different. Reporting of autonomic symptoms and somatic anxiety was higher than normal in both patient groups but not significantly different between LDS and VV patients. Handicap levels were not different in the two patient groups, but the reporting of vestibular symptoms was higher in the VV than in the LDS group. The experimental stimuli required subjects to set the subjective visual vertical in three visual conditions: total darkness, in front of a tilted luminous frame (rod and frame test) and in front of a large disc rotating in the frontal plane (rod and disc test). Body sway was also measured in four visual conditions: eyes closed, eyes open, facing the tilted frame and during disc rotation. In psychophysical and postural tests, both LDS and VV patients showed: (i) a significant increase in the tilt of the visual vertical both with the static tilted frame and with the rotating disc; and (ii) an increased postural deviation whilst facing the tilted frame and the rotating disc. The ratio between sway path with eyes closed and eyes open (i.e. the stabilizing effect of vision) was increased in the LDS, but not in VV patients, compared with normal subjects. In contrast, the ratio between sway path during disc rotation and sway path during eyes open (i.e. the destabilizing effect of a moving visual stimulus) was increased in the VV patients but not in LDS. Taken together, these data show that VV patients have abnormally large perceptual and postural responses to disorienting visual environments. VV is not related to trait anxiety or a past history of motion sickness. The results indicate that VV emerges in vestibular patients if they have increased visual dependence and difficulty in resolving conflict between visual and vestibulo-proprioceptive inputs. It is argued that treating these patients with visual motion desensitization, e.g. repeated optokinetic stimulation, should be beneficial.

The perception of body verticality (subjective postural vertical, SPV) was assessed in normal subjects and in patients with peripheral and central vestibular lesions and the data were compared with conventional neuro-otological assessments. Subjects were seated with eyes closed in a motorized gimbal which executed cycles of tilt at low constant speed (1.5 degrees s-1), both in the frontal (roll) and sagittal (pitch) planes. Subjects indicated with a joystick when they entered and left verticality, thus defining a sector of subjective uprightness in each plane. The mean angle of tilt (identifying a bias of the SPV) and the width of the sector (defining sensitivity of the SPV) were then determined. In normal subjects, the angle of the "verticality' sector was 5.9 degrees for pitch and roll. Patients with bilateral absence of vestibular function, patients with vertigo, i.e. acute unilateral lesions, benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) and Ménière's disease, and patients with positionally modulated up-/downbeat nystagmus all had enlarged sectors (i.e. loss in sensitivity). Mean sector angle in these groups ranged from 7.8 to 11 degrees and the abnormality was present both in pitch and roll, regardless of the direction of nystagmus or body sway. Patients with chronic unilateral peripheral vestibular lesions and those with position-independent vertical nystagmus had normal sensitivities. No significant bias of the SPV was found in any patient group, not even those with acute unilateral vestibular lesions who had marked tilts of the subjective visual vertical (SVV). Complementary experiments in normal subjects tested under galvanic vestibular or roll-plane optokinetic stimulation also failed to show biases of the SPV. In contrast, a significant bias in the SPV could be induced in normal subjects by asymmetric cycles of gimbals tilt, presumably by proprioceptive adaptation. The following conclusions can be drawn. (i) The perception of body verticality whilst seated is mainly dependent on proprioceptive/contact cues but these are susceptible to tilt-mediated adaptation. (ii) Vestibular input improves the sensitivity of the SPV, even in vestibular disorders, as long as the abnormality is stable. (iii) There can be marked dissociation between vestibulo-motor (ocular and postural) phenomena and the perception of body verticality, and between the SPV and SVV. (iv) The postural sway asymmetries in patients with peripheral and central vestibular lesions, like those induced by galvanic or optokinetic stimulation in normal subjects, are not consequences of changes of the SPV.