Cited by 55Vestibular and auditory disordersBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts

Phobic postural vertigo: Body sway during visually induced roll vection

Querner, Veronika, Krafczyk, Siegbert, Dieterich, Marianne, Brandt, Thomas·2002·Experimental Brain Research

Abstract

Patients with phobic postural vertigo (PPV) often report a particularly increased unsteadiness when looking at moving visual scenes. Therefore, the differential effects of large-field visual motion stimulation in roll plane on body sway during upright stance were analyzed in 23 patients with PPV, who had been selected for the integrity of their vestibular and balance systems, and in 17 healthy subjects. Visual motion stimulation induced a sensation of apparent body motion (roll vection) in all patients and normal subjects. Normal subjects showed an increased lateral sway path with a lateral shift of the center of pressure (COP) in stimulus direction (mean 1.67 cm, SD 1.63). The patients also exhibited an increase in sway path during visual motion stimulation; however, their body sway differed from that of normals in that there was no lateral displacement of COP (mean 0.19 cm, SD 0.73). The lateral displacement of COP and the increase in RMS of body sway during visual motion stimulation were significantly greater in normals than in the patients ( p<0.05). The patients' increased body sway without COP deviation does not imply an increased risk of falling. Two explanations are conceivable for this increased body sway without body deviation in patients with PPV: (a) the patients rely more on proprioceptive and vestibular rather than on visual cues to regulate upright stance; or (b) they depend on visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive information, but the threshold at which they initiate a compensatory body sway opposite in direction to a perceived body deviation is lower than in normal subjects. The data support the second explanation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00221-001-0955-y

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Querner, V., Krafczyk, S., Dieterich, M., & Brandt, T.
Affiliations
LMU Klinikum (DE)
Corresponding author
Querner, Veronika
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Published
2002-02-09
Volume
143
Issue
3
Pages
269-275
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
OpenAlex
W1538708586
Cited by
55
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Keywords
phobic postural vertigo, postural sway, center of pressure, upright posture, postural control, visual-vestibular interaction, proprioception, fall risk
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cues, Dizziness, Postural Balance, Female, Humans, Illusions, Male, Middle Aged, Motion Perception, Movement Disorders, Phobic Disorders, Photic Stimulation, Proprioception, Vertigo

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review