Explore the vast range of titles available.

Noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation (nGVS) delivered at imperceptible intensities can improve vestibular function in health and disease. Here we evaluated whether nGVS effects on vestibular function are only present during active stimulation or may exhibit relevant post-stimulation after-effects. Initially, nGVS amplitudes that optimally improve posture were determined in 13 healthy subjects. Subsequently, effects of optimal nGVS amplitudes on vestibular roll-tilt direction recognition thresholds (DRT) were examined during active and sham nGVS. Ten of 13 subjects exhibited reduced DRTs during active nGVS compared to sham stimulation (p < 0.001). These 10 participants were then administered to 30 mins of active nGVS treatment while being allowed to move freely. Immediately post-treatment , DRTs were increased again (p = 0.044), reverting to baseline threshold levels (i.e. were comparable to the sham nGVS thresholds), and remained stable in a follow-up assessment after 30 min. After three weeks, participants returned for a follow-up experiment to control for learning effects, in which DRTs were measured during and immediately after 30 min application of sham nGVS. DRTs during both assessments did not differ from baseline level. These findings indicate that nGVS does not induce distinct post-stimulation effects on vestibular motion perception and favor the development of a wearable technology that continuously delivers nGVS to patients in order to enhance vestibular function.

Background Patients with bilateral vestibulopathy (BVP) suffer from impaired vestibular motion perception that is linked to deficits in spatial memory and navigation. Objective To examine the potential therapeutic effect of imperceptible noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation (nGVS) on impaired vestibular perceptual performance in BVP. Methods In 11 patients with BVP (mean age: 54.0 ± 8.3 years, 7 females), we initially determined the nGVS intensity that optimally stabilizes balance during a static posturographic assessment. Subsequently, effects of optimal nGVS vs. sham stimulation on vestibular motion perception were examined in randomized order. Vestibular perceptual performance was determined as direction recognition thresholds for head-centered roll tilt motion on a 6DOF motion platform in the absence of any visual or auditory motion cues. Results For each patient, an nGVS intensity that optimally stabilized static balance compared to sham stimulation could be identified (mean 0.36 ± 0.16 mA). nGVS at optimal intensity resulted in lowered vestibular perceptual thresholds (0.94 ± 0.30 deg/s) compared to sham stimulation (1.67 ± 1.11 deg/s; p  = 0.040). nGVS-induced improvements in vestibular perception were observed in 8 of 11 patients (73%) and were greater in patients with poorer perceptual performance during sham stimulation ( R  = − 0.791; p  = 0.007). Conclusions nGVS is effective in improving impaired vestibular motion perception in patients with BVP, in particular in those patients with poor baseline perceptual performance. Imperceptible vestibular noise stimulation might thus offer a non-invasive approach to target BVP-related impairments in spatial memory, orientation, and navigation.

ObjectiveNoisy galvanic vestibular stimulation (nGVS) has been shown to partly restore vestibular function and to stabilize stance and gait in patients with incomplete bilateral vestibulopathy (BVP). Here, we examined potential synergistic effects of nGVS when combined with standardized vestibular rehabilitation training (VRT).Methods23 patients with confirmed BVP received a 30-min vestibular rehabilitation training (VRT) program three times a week for 2 weeks. The intervention group (n = 12) was stimulated with nGVS (at individually determined optimal amplitudes) during training, whereas the control group (n = 11) received zero-amplitude nGVS (sham stimulation) during training. Outcome measurements assessed at baseline, after 2 weeks of training, and at 2-week follow-up included quantitative posturography, instrumented gait analysis, Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), Functional Gait Assessment (FGA), and clinical scores related to quality of life and balance confidence.ResultsAfter 2 weeks of VRT, all patients showed moderate improvement in balance. Irrespective of nGVS treatment, performance improved in the TUG (p < 0.013), and in the FGA (p < 0.040). Furthermore, base of support when walking with closed eyes was reduced after 2-week training (p < 0.003). Postural sway did not change. There was no difference between groups and thereby no evidence for an additional influence of nGVS on the VRT treatment effects.ConclusionnGVS does not induce synergistic treatment effects in combination with VRT in patients with BVP when applied during treatment sessions. Hence, rather than being applied in parallel, nGVS and VRT might be complementary therapeutic options with nGVS being used during postural activities in daily life, e.g., walking.