ObjectiveTo determine the influence of daily use of spectacles to correct a refractive error, on the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gain measured with the video head impulse test (vHIT).Study designThis prospective study enrolled subjects between 18 and 80 years old with and without a refractive error. Subjects were classified into three groups: (1) contact lenses, (2) spectacles, and (3) control group without visual impairment. Exclusion criteria comprised ophthalmic pathology, history of vestibular disorders, and alternated use of spectacles and contact lenses in daily life. Corrective spectacles were removed seconds before testing. One examiner performed all vHIT’s under standardized circumstances using the EyeSeeCam system. This system calculated the horizontal VOR gain for rightward and leftward head rotations separately.ResultsNo statistically significant difference was found in VOR gain between the control group (n = 16), spectacles group (n = 48), and contact lenses group (n = 15) (p = 0.111). Both the spectacles group and contact lenses group showed no statistically significant correlation between VOR gain and amount of refractive error, for rightwards (p = 0.071) and leftwards (p = 0.716) head rotations. There was no statistical significant difference in VOR gain between testing monocularly or binocularly (p = 0.132) and between testing with or without wearing contact lenses (p = 0.800).ConclusionIn this study, VOR gain was not influenced by wearing corrective spectacles or contact lenses on a daily basis. Based on this study, no corrective measures are necessary when performing the vHIT on subjects with a refractive error, regardless of the way of correction.

Introduction: Bilateral vestibulopathy (BV) is a chronic condition in which vestibular function is severely impaired or absent on both ears. Oscillopsia is one of the main symptoms of BV. Oscillopsia can be quantified objectively by functional vestibular tests, and subjectively by questionnaires. Recently, a new technique for testing functionally effective gaze stabilization was developed: the functional Head Impulse Test (fHIT). This study compared the fHIT with the Dynamic Visual Acuity assessed on a treadmill (DVA treadmill ) and Oscillopsia Severity Questionnaire (OSQ) in the context of objectifying the experience of oscillopsia in patients with BV. Methods: Inclusion criteria comprised: (1) summated slow phase velocity of nystagmus of <20°/s during bithermal caloric tests, (2) torsion swing tests gain of <30% and/or phase <168°, and (3) complaints of oscillopsia and/or imbalance. During the fHIT (Beon Solutions srl, Italy) patients were seated in front of a computer screen. During a passive horizontal head impulse a Landolt C optotype was shortly displayed. Patients reported the seen optotype by pressing the corresponding button on a keyboard. The percentage correct answers was registered for leftwards and rightwards head impulses separately. During DVA treadmill patients were positioned on a treadmill in front of a computer screen that showed Sloan optotypes. Patients were tested in static condition and in dynamic conditions (while walking on the treadmill at 2, 4, and 6 km/h). The decline in LogMAR between static and dynamic conditions was registered for each speed. Every patient completed the Oscillopsia Severity Questionnaire (OSQ). Results: In total 23 patients were included. This study showed a moderate correlation between OSQ outcomes and the fHIT [rightwards head rotations ( r s = −0.559; p = 0.006) leftwards head rotations ( r s = −0.396; p = 0.061)]. No correlation was found between OSQ outcomes and DVA treadmill , or between DVA treadmill and fHIT. All patients completed the fHIT, 52% of the patients completed the DVA treadmill on all speeds. Conclusion: The fHIT seems to be a feasible test to quantify oscillopsia in BV since, unlike DVA treadmill , it correlates with the experienced oscillopsia measured by the OSQ, and more BV patients are able to complete the fHIT than DVA treadmill .

Introduction A horizontal vestibulo-ocular reflex gain (VOR gain) of < 0.6, measured by the video head impulse test (VHIT), is one of the diagnostic criteria for bilateral vestibulopathy (BV) according to the Báràny Society. Several VHIT systems are commercially available, each with different techniques of tracking head and eye movements and different methods of gain calculation. This study compared three different VHIT systems in patients diagnosed with BV. Methods This study comprised 46 BV patients (diagnosed according to the Báràny criteria), tested with three commercial VHIT systems (Interacoustics, Otometrics and Synapsys) in random order. Main outcome parameter was VOR gain as calculated by the system, and the agreement on BV diagnosis (VOR gain < 0.6) between the VHIT systems. Peak head velocities, the order effect and covert saccades were analysed separately, to determine whether these parameters could have influenced differences in outcome between VHIT systems. Results VOR gain in the Synapsys system differed significantly from VOR gain in the other two systems [F(1.256, 33.916) = 35.681, p < 0.000]. The VHIT systems agreed in 83% of the patients on the BV diagnosis. Peak head velocities, the order effect and covert saccades were not likely to have influenced the above mentioned results. Conclusion To conclude, using different VHIT systems in the same BV patient can lead to clinically significant differences in VOR gain, when using a cutoff value of 0.6. This might hinder proper diagnosis of BV patients. It would, therefore, be preferred that VHIT systems are standardised regarding eye and head tracking methods, and VOR gain calculation algorithms. Until then, it is advised to not only take the VOR gain in consideration when assessing a VHIT trial, but also look at the raw traces and the compensatory saccades.

Objective: This study aimed to identify differences in vestibulo-ocular reflex gain (VOR gain) and saccadic response in the suppression head impulse paradigm (SHIMP) between predictable and less predictable head movements, in a group of healthy subjects. It was hypothesized that higher prediction could lead to a lower VOR gain, a shorter saccadic latency, and higher grouping of saccades.Methods: Sixty-two healthy subjects were tested using the video head impulse test and SHIMPs in four conditions: active and passive head movements for both inward and outward directions. VOR gain, latency of the first saccade, and the level of saccade grouping (PR-score) were compared among conditions. Inward and active head movements were considered to be more predictable than outward and passive head movements.Results: After validation, results of 57 tested subjects were analyzed. Mean VOR gain was significantly lower for inward passive compared with outward passive head impulses (p &lt; 0.001), and it was higher for active compared with passive head impulses (both inward and outward) (p ≤ 0.024). Mean latency of the first saccade was significantly shorter for inward active compared with inward passive (p ≤ 0.001) and for inward passive compared with outward passive head impulses (p = 0.012). Mean PR-score was only significantly higher in active outward than in active inward head impulses (p = 0.004).Conclusion: For SHIMP, a higher predictability in head movements lowered gain only in passive impulses and shortened latencies of compensatory saccades overall. For active impulses, gain calculation was affected by short-latency compensatory saccades, hindering reliable comparison with gains of passive impulses. Predictability did not substantially influence grouping of compensatory saccades.