Jean-Marie Hanssens

Development of visually driven postural reactivity: A fully immersive virtual reality study

The objective of this study was to investigate the development of visually driven postural regulation in typically developing children of different ages. Thirty-two typically developing participants from 5 age groups (5-7 years, 8-11 years, 12-15 years, 16-19 years, or 20-25 years) were asked to stand within a virtual tunnel that oscillated in an anterior-posterior fashion at three different frequencies (0.125, 0.25, and 0.5 Hz). Body sway (BS) and postural perturbations (as measured by velocity root mean squared or vRMS) were measured. Most of the 5- to 7-year-old participants (67%) were unable to remain standing during the dynamic conditions. For older participants, BS decreased significantly with age for all frequencies. Moreover, vRMS decreased significantly from the 8- to 11- through 16- to 19-years age groups (greatest decreases for 0.5 Hz, followed by 0.25-Hz and 0.125-Hz conditions). No difference of frequency or instability was found between the 16- to 19- and 20- to 25-year-old groups for most conditions. Results suggest an over-reliance on visual input relative to proprioceptive and vestibular inputs on postural regulation at young ages (5-7 years). The finding that vRMS decreased significantly with age before stabilizing between 16 and 19 years suggests an important transitory period for sensorimotor development within this age range.

Effect of visual field locus and oscillation frequencies on posture control in an ecological environment

To examine the respective roles of central and peripheral vision in the control of posture, body sway amplitude (BSA) and postural perturbations (given by velocity root mean square or vRMS) were calculated in a group of 19 healthy young adults. The stimulus was a 3D tunnel, either static or moving sinusoidally in the anterior-posterior direction. There were nine visual field conditions: four central conditions (4, 7, 15, and 30 degrees); four peripheral conditions (central occlusions of 4, 7, 15, and 30 degrees); and a full visual field condition (FF). The virtual tunnel respected all the aspects of a real physical tunnel (i.e., stereoscopy and size increase with proximity). The results show that, under static conditions, central and peripheral visual fields appear to have equal importance for the control of stance. In the presence of an optic flow, peripheral vision plays a crucial role in the control of stance, since it is responsible for a compensatory sway, whereas central vision has an accessory role that seems to be related to spatial orientation.

Myopes Show Greater Visually Induced Postural Responses Than Emmetropes.

PURPOSE The literature already establishes that vision plays a crucial role in postural control and that this visual dependence shows intra- and interindividual variability. However, does ametropia also have an effect on postural control? This question leads to our study, which aims primarily to determine if myopes and emmetropes behave differently in terms of postural control when subjected to visual stimulation, and secondarily, if this difference persists in the presence of barrel and pincushion distortions. The results could lead, among other things, to improved lens design. METHODS Twenty-four subjects (12 myopes of -2.00 to -9.00 diopters [D] and 12 emmetropes of -0.50 to +0.50 D), between 19 and 35 years of age, participated in the study after comprehensive eye examinations were carried out. Of the 12 myopes, the preferred type of correction was divided equally within the group. While standing in front of a projection system and fixating on an immobile point, a checkerboard stimulus was displayed in their peripheral visual field, in either a static or dynamic state. Three conditions of optical distortion (plan, pincushion, and barrel distortions) were presented to the subjects. Their postural response was measured and recorded using a system of infrared cameras and optical sensors positioned on a helmet. RESULTS The results show that postural instability induced by a dynamic peripheral stimulus is higher for myopes compared with emmetropes (ANOVA Refractive Error, F1,22 = 5.92, P = 0.0235). When exposed to optical distortions, the two groups also have significant differences in postural behaviors (ANOVA Refractive Error*Optical Distortion, F2,44 = 5.67, P = 0.0064). CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that refractive error could be a factor in explaining individual variations of the role of vision in postural control.