Visual feedback is not necessary for recalibrating the vestibular contribution to the dynamic phase of a perturbation recovery response

Comparison Between Effects of Galvanic and Vibration-Based Vestibular Stimulation on Postural Control and Gait Performance in Healthy Participants: A Systematic Review of Cross-Sectional Studies

Electricity and vibration were two commonly used physical agents to provide vestibular stimulation in previous studies. This study aimed to systematically review the effects of galvanic (GVS) and vibration-based vestibular stimulation (VVS) on gait performance and postural control in healthy participants. Five bioscience and engineering databases, including MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL via EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase, were searched until March 19th, 2023. Studies published between 2000 and 2023 in English involving GVS and VVS related to gait performance and postural control were included. The procedure was followed via the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the NIH study quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. A total of 55 cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Five studies were good-quality while 49 were moderate-quality and 1 was poor-quality. There were 50 included studies involving GVS and 5 included studies involving VVS. GVS and VVS utilized different physical agents to provide vestibular stimulation and demonstrated similar effects on vestibular perception. Supra-threshold GVS and VVS produced vestibular perturbation that impaired gait performance and postural control, while sub-threshold GVS and VVS induced stochastic resonance phenomenon that led to an improvement. Bilateral vestibular stimulation demonstrated a greater effect on gait and posture than unilateral vestibular stimulation. Compared to GVS, VVS had the characteristics of better tolerance and fewer side effects, which may substitute GVS to provide more acceptable vestibular stimulation.

A portable and low-cost solution for real-time manipulation of the vestibular sense

BACKGROUND

The vestibular system encodes head motion in space which is naturally accompanied by other sensory cues. Electrical stimuli, applied across the mastoid processes, selectively activate primary vestibular afferents which has spurred clinical and biomedical applications of electrical vestibular stimulation (EVS). When properly matched to head motion, EVS may also manipulate the closed-loop relationship between actions and vestibular feedback to reveal the mechanisms of sensorimotor recalibration and learning.

NEW METHOD

We designed a portable, low-cost real-time EVS system using an Arduino microcontroller programmed through Simulink that provides electrical currents based on head angular motion. We used well-characterized vestibular afferent physiological responses to head angular velocity and electrical current to compute head-motion equivalent of real-time modulatory EVS currents. We also examined if our system induced recalibration of the vestibular system during human balance control.

RESULTS

Our system operated at 199.997 Hz ( ± 0.005 Hz) and delivered head-motion-equivalent electrical currents with ∼10 ms delay. The output driving the current stimulator matched the implemented linear model for physiological vestibular afferent dynamics with minimal background noise (<0.2% of ± 10 V range). Participants recalibrated to the modulated closed-loop vestibular feedback using visual cues during standing balance, replicating earlier findings.

COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS

EVS is typically used to impose external perturbations that are independent of one's own movement. We provided a solution using open-source hardware to implement a real-time, physiology based, and task-relevant vestibular modulations using EVS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our portable, low-cost vestibular modulation system will make physiological closed-loop vestibular manipulations more accessible thus encouraging novel investigations and biomedical applications of EVS.

Developing Proprioceptive Countermeasures to Mitigate Postural and Locomotor Control Deficits After Long-Duration Spaceflight

Astronauts experience post-flight disturbances in postural and locomotor control due to sensorimotor adaptations during spaceflight. These alterations may have adverse consequences if a rapid egress is required after landing. Although current exercise protocols can effectively mitigate cardiovascular and muscular deconditioning, the benefits to post-flight sensorimotor dysfunction are limited. Furthermore, some exercise capabilities like treadmill running are currently not feasible on exploration spaceflight vehicles. Thus, new in-flight operational countermeasures are needed to mitigate postural and locomotor control deficits after exploration missions. Data from spaceflight and from analog studies collectively suggest that body unloading decreases the utilization of proprioceptive input, and this adaptation strongly contributes to balance dysfunction after spaceflight. For example, on return to Earth, an astronaut's vestibular input may be compromised by adaptation to microgravity, but their proprioceptive input is compromised by body unloading. Since proprioceptive and tactile input are important for maintaining postural control, keeping these systems tuned to respond to upright balance challenges during flight may improve functional task performance after flight through dynamic reweighting of sensory input. Novel approaches are needed to compensate for the challenges of balance training in microgravity and must be tested in a body unloading environment such as head down bed rest. Here, we review insights from the literature and provide observations from our laboratory that could inform the development of an in-flight proprioceptive countermeasure.