Virtual Reality

, Volume 19, Issue 3–4, pp 267–275 | Cite as

Simulator sickness incidence and susceptibility during neck motion-controlled virtual reality tasks

  • Julia Treleaven
  • Jenna Battershill
  • Deborah Cole
  • Carissa Fadelli
  • Simon Freestone
  • Katie Lang
  • Hilla Sarig-Bahat
Original Article

Abstract

To determine the incidence, severity, and predisposing factors to simulator sickness (SS) when using the neck virtual reality (VR) device in asymptomatic individuals to understand the risk of provoking SS in the development of neck VR as a rehabilitation tool. Thirty-two participants used the VR system. Postural stability was measured before and after each VR module [range of motion (ROM), velocity, and accuracy]. The duration of each module was recorded, and participants reported their SS using a visual analogue scale (SS–VAS)/100 mm. Following the VR assessment, participants completed the Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire (MSSQ) (child and adult subsections) and Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ). The incidence of motion sickness during the VR immersion was 28 %, and the mean severity was 17.2 mm on VAS. There was a significant difference in ROM time, total time, MSSQ score, and SSQ score (p < 0.05) between those who reported any level of SS–VAS and those with no SS–VAS. The SS–VAS score displayed significant positive correlations with SSQ score, change in postural stability time pre to post, ROM time, and total time. Results indicate a relatively high incidence but low severity of SS which was associated with the MSSQ child subsection score and exposure time.

Keywords

Virtual reality Motion sickness Velocity Neck Rehabilitation 

References

  1. Bohannon RW, Larkin PA, Cook AC, Gear J, Singer J (1984) Decrease in timed balance test scores with aging. Phys Ther 64(7):1067–1070Google Scholar
  2. Bos JE, Bles W, Groen EL (2008) A theory on visually induced motion sickness. Displays 29(2):47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Braithwaite MG, Braithwaite BD (1990) Simulator sickness in an army simulator. J Soc Occup Med 40(3):105–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brotherton SS, Williams HG, Gossard JL, Hussey JR, McClenaghan BA, Eleazer P (2005) Are measures employed in the assessment of balance useful for detecting differences among groups that vary by age and disease state? J Geriatr Phys Ther 28(1):14–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bryanton C, Bosse J, Brien M, McLean J, McCormick A, Sveistrup H (2006) Feasibility, motivation, and selective motor control: virtual reality compared to conventional home exercise in children with cerebral palsy. CyberPsychol Behav 9(2):123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cobb SVG (1998) Measurement of postural stability before and after immersion in a virtual environment. Appl Ergon 30(1):47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cobb SVG, Nichols SC (1999) Static posture tests for the assessment of postural instability after virtual environment use. Brain Res Bull 47(5):459–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Corneil BD, Olivier E, Munoz DP (2002) Neck muscle responses to stimulation of monkey superior colliculus: topography and manipulation of stimulation parameters. J Neurophysiol 88(4):1980–1999Google Scholar
  9. Draper MH, Viirre ES, Furness TA, Gawron VJ (2001) Effects of image scale and system time delay on simulator sickness within head-coupled virtual environments. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 43(1):129–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eisenman LM (2009) Motion sickness may be caused by a neurohumoral action of acetylcholine. Med Hypotheses 73(5):790–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feipel V, Rondelet B, LePallec JP, DeWitte O, Rooze M (1999) The use of disharmonic motion curves in problems of the cervical spine. Int Orthop 23(4):205–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frank LH, Casali JG, Wierwille WW (1988) Effects of visual display and motion system delays on operator performance and uneasiness in a driving simulator. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 30(2):201–217Google Scholar
  13. Golding JF (2006a) Motion sickness susceptibility. Auton Neurosci Basic Clin 129(1–2):67–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Golding JF (2006b) Predicting individual differences in motion sickness susceptibility by questionnaire. Personal Individ Differ 41(2):237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Golding JF, Gresty MA (2005) Motion sickness. Curr Opin Neurol 18(1):29–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jerome C, Darnell R, Oakley B, Pepe A (2005) The effect of presence and time of exposure on simulator sickness. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 49(25):2258–2262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kennedy RS, Stanney KM (1996) Postural instability induced by virtual reality exposure: development of a certification protocol. Int J Hum Comput Interact 8(1):25–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kennedy RS, Hettinger LJ, Lilienthal MG (1990) Simulator sickness. In Crampton GH (ed) Motion and space sickness, CRC press, Inc., Florida, pp 317–341Google Scholar
  19. Kennedy RS, Lane NE, Berbaum KS, Lilienthal MG (1993) Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int J Aviat Psychol 3(3):203–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kennedy RS, Berbaum KS, Lilienthal MG (1997) Disorientation and postural ataxia following flight simulation. Aviat Space Environ Med 68(1):13Google Scholar
  21. Kennedy RS, Stanney KM, Dunlap WP (2000) Duration and exposure to virtual environments: sickness curves during and across sessions. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 9(5):463–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keshavarz B, Hecht H (2011) Validating an efficient method to quantify motion sickness. Hum Factors 53(4):415–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lampton DR, Rodriguez ME, Cotton JE (2000) Simulator sickness symptoms during team training in immersive virtual environments. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Ann Meet 44:530–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ling Y, Nefs HT, Brinkman W, Qu C, Heynderickx I (2013) The relationship between individual characteristics and experienced presence. Comput Hum Behav 29(4):1519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liu J, Thornell L, Pedrosa-Domellof F (2003) Muscle spindles in the deep muscles of the human neck: a morphological and immunocytochemical study. J Histochem Cytochem 51(2):175–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Meehan M, Razzaque S, Whitton M C, Brooks Jr FP (2003) Effect of latency on presence in stressful virtual environments. Paper presented at the virtual reality, 2003. Proceedings. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  27. Merhi O, Faugloire E, Flanagan M, Stoffregen TA (2007) Motion sickness, console video games, and head-mounted displays. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 49(5):920–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mirelman A, Bonato P, Deutsch JE (2009) Effects of training with a robot-virtual reality system compared with a robot alone on the gait of individuals after stroke. J Cereb Circ 40(1):169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Money KE (1970) Motion sickness. Physiol Rev 50(1):1–39Google Scholar
  30. Moss J, Muth E (2011) Characteristics of head-mounted displays and their effects on simulator sickness. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 53(3):308–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Öhberg F, Grip H, Wiklund U, Sterner Y, Karlsson JS, Gerdle B (2003) Chronic whiplash associated disorders and neck movement measurements: an instantaneous helical axis approach. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 7(4):274–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Regan EC, Price KR (1994) The frequency of occurrence and severity of side-effects of immersion virtual reality. Aviat Space Environ Med 65:527–530Google Scholar
  33. Rizzo A, Kim GJ (2005) A SWOT analysis of the field of virtual reality rehabilitation and therapy. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 14(2):119–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Röijezon U, Djupsjöbacka M, Björklund M, Häger-Ross C, Grip H, Liebermann DG (2010) Kinematics of fast cervical rotations in persons with chronic neck pain: a cross-sectional and reliability study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 11(1):222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sarig Bahat H, Takasaki H, Chen X, Bet-Or Y, Treleaven J (2015) Cervical kinematic training with and without interactive VR training for chronic neck pain—a randomized clinical trial. Man ther 20(1):68–78. doi:10.1016/j.math.2014.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sarig-Bahat H, Weiss PLT, Laufer Y (2009) Cervical motion assessment using virtual reality. Spine 34(10):1018–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sarig-Bahat H, Weiss PLT, Laufer Y (2010) Neck pain assessment in a virtual environment. Spine 35(4):105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Selbie WS, Thomson DB, Richmond FJ (1993) Suboccipital muscles in the cat neck: morphometry and histochemistry of the rectus capitis muscle complex. J Morphol 216(1):47–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sharar SR, Miller W, Teeley A, Soltani M, Hoffman HG, Jensen MP, Patterson DR (2008) Applications of virtual reality for pain management in burn-injured patients. Expert Rev Neurother 8(11):1667–1674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sharples S, Cobb S, Moody A, Wilson JR (2008) Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. Displays 29(2):58–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sjölander P, Michaelson P, Jaric S, Djupsjöbacka M (2008) Sensorimotor disturbances in chronic neck pain: range of motion, peak velocity, smoothness of movement, and repositioning acuity. Man Ther 13(2):122–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stanney KM, Hash P (1998) Locus of user-initiated control in virtual environments: influences on cybersickness. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 7(5):447–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stanney KM, Kennedy RS (1998) Aftereffects from virtual environment exposure: how long do they last? Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Ann Meet 42(21):1476–1480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stanney KM, Kennedy RS, Drexler JM, Harm DL (1999a) Motion sickness and proprioceptive aftereffects following virtual environment exposure. Appl Ergon 30(1):27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stanney KM, Lanham DS, Kennedy RS, Breaux R (1999b) Virtual environment exposure drop-out thresholds. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Ann Meet 43(22):1223–1227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stanney KM, Kingdon KS, Kennedy RS (2002) Dropouts and aftereffects: examining general accessibility to virtual environment technology. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Ann Meet 46(26):2114–2118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stanney KM, Hale KS, Nahmens I, Kennedy RS (2003) What to expect from immersive virtual environment exposure: influences of gender, body mass index, and past experience. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 45(3):504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stoffregen TA, Smart LJ (1998) Postural instability precedes motion sickness. Brain Res Bull 47(5):437–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vereeck L, Wuyts F, Truijen S, Van de Heyning P (2008) Clinical assessment of balance: normative data, and gender and age effects. Int J Audiol 47(2):67–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Villard S, Flanagan M, Albanese G, Stoffregen T (2008) Postural instability and motion sickness in a virtual moving room. Hum Factors 50(2):332–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Warwick-Evans LA, Symons N, Fitch T, Burrows L (1998) Evaluating sensory conflict and postural instability: theories of motion sickness. Brain Res Bull 47(5):465–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Webb CM, Bass JM, Johnson DM, Kelley AM, Martin CR, Wildzunas RM (2009) Simulator sickness in a helicopter flight training school. Aviat Space Environ Med 80(6):541–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wulf G, Su J (2007) An external focus of attention enhances golf shot accuracy in beginners and experts. Res Q Exerc Sport 78(4):384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Young SD, Adelstein BD, Ellis SR (2007) Demand characteristics in assessing motion sickness in a virtual environment: or does taking a motion sickness questionnaire make you sick? IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 13(3):422–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Department of PhysiotherapyUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.The Department of Physical TherapyUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations