Correlations Between Foam Posturography and Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potential Tests in Ménière’s Disease

Abstract

By removing or reducing both visual and somatosensory inputs from foam posturography, the remaining vestibular cue, represented as RQ of sway area on foam pad, may reflect utricular function.

Assessment of functional development of the otolithic system in growing children: A review

“…However, the RQ of the sway area on foam pad did not significantly differ in terms of cVEMP or caloric test results [31,70]. Furthermore, in cases of abnormal oVEMPs, additionally abnormal cVEMP and caloric results did not increase the RQ value of sway area on the foam pad, indicating that RQ of sway area on foam pad is merely related to the utricular function [31].…”

“…Restated, by removing or reducing both visual and somatosensory inputs from foam posturography, the remaining vestibular cue, represented as RQ of sway area on foam pad, may reflect utricular function [31].…”

“…To exclude both visual and somatosensory inputs, the foam posturography with eyes closed condition is utilized for evaluating the vestibular function [26][27][28][29], and the Romberg quotient (RQ) of the sway area on foam pad is considered to reflect the otolithic function [30,31]. Restated, the posturography is designed to evaluate and record postural balance status, and is often coupled with vestibular test battery to identify sensory input deficits and assess functional development of the vestibular system in children [27,31].…”

Effect of betel nut chewing on the otolithic reflex system

“…Lin and Young (2011) correlated the static SVH test with the dynamic oVEMP test in healthy and pathological ears and confirmed that both tests may, at least in part, share the same utricular reflex pathway. In addition, the Romberg quotient of sway area on foam posturography has been associated with the oVEMP test results (Lin et al, 2013). However, it is the acceleration of the head or tilt that activates the otolithic organs (from their steady state) and not standing still on a foam pad.…”

“…The norm for the latency of peak nI at our laboratory was 11.4 ± 0.8 ms. Alternatively, if oVEMP was not induced, then the ipsilateral mastoid site (2 cm behind the opening of external ear canal) was tapped. Ears with absent oVEMP from forehead tapping but present oVEMP from mastoid tapping were also interpreted as having reduced responses (Tseng et al, 2012;Lin et al, 2013).…”