Professional Documents
Culture Documents
URRENT
C
OPINION
Purpose of review
Motion sickness remains bothersome in conventional transport and is an emerging hazard in visual
information technologies. Treatment remains unsatisfactory but advances in brain imaging,
neurophysiology, and neuropharmacology may provide insights into more effective drug and behavioural
management. We review these major developments.
Recent findings
Recent progress has been in identifying brain mechanisms and loci associated with motion sickness and
nausea per se. The techniques have included conventional neurophysiology, pathway mapping, and
functional MRI, implicating multiple brain regions including cortex, brainstem, and cerebellum.
Understanding of the environmental and behavioural conditions provocative of and protective against
motion sickness and how vestibular disease may sensitize to motion sickness has increased. The problem of
nauseogenic information technology has emerged as a target for research, motivated by its ubiquitous
applications. Increased understanding of the neurophysiology and brain regions associated with motion
sickness may provide for more effective medication in the future. However, the polysymptomatic nature of
motion sickness, high interindividual variability, and the extensive brain regions involved may preclude a
single, decisive treatment.
Summary
Motion sickness is an emerging hazard in information technologies. Adaptation remains the most effective
countermeasure together with established medications, notably scopolamine and antihistamines.
Neuropharmacological investigations may provide more effective medication in the foreseeable future.
Keywords
motion sickness, neurophysiology, vestibular, virtual reality
INTRODUCTION
&
&
&&
&
PROVOCATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
In an extensive survey of a cruise ship, motion sickness was the most common reason for physicians
a
SYMPTOMATOLOGY
Motion sickness is polysymptomatic. Nausea and
vomiting may be accompanied by a host of significant symptoms including headache, sopite (drowsiness), sweating, facial pallor, cold sweating,
increased salivation, sensations of bodily warmth,
1350-7540 Copyright 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
www.co-neurology.com
KEY POINTS
Habituation remains the most effective treatment for
motion sickness.
There have been very few practical advances in
antimotion sickness medication over the standard
treatments such as scopolamine or antihistamines.
Visually induced motion sickness through new
technologies such as 3D displays has emerged as a
significant new source of motion sickness.
&&
&
&
&
&&
&&
84
www.co-neurology.com
&&
&
&
&&
&&
&&
100
MS susceptibility 95% CI
Comparison bs control
*P < 0.05 **P < 0.01
***P < 0.001 (total n = 326)
80
***
60
40
20
**
0
Control
***
BVL
UVL
&&
&&
&
&&
&&
&&
&&
&&
&&
&&
perhaps indicating that other types of sensory conflict without vestibular input are sometimes
possible. Unilateral vestibular loss (UVL) also
decreases susceptibility but to a lesser extent than
BVL; however, it should be noted that these were
compensated patients with UVL, that is, who have
adapted to sensory conflict caused by the loss of
vestibular function on one side, since in the acute
phase, the usual observation is that patients with UVL
may be more sensitive to motion. Patients with vestibular neuritis and benign paroxysmal positional
vertigo show no overall difference in susceptibility
compared with controls but within this broad picture
many individuals have up or downregulated their
sensitivity to motion in response to their disease.
Vestibular migraine leads to greatly elevated
susceptibility and patients attending migraine clinics, but without vestibular migraine, have equivalent elevations of susceptibility. Other recent studies
have shown that vestibular symptoms including
motion sickness are greater in patients diagnosed
with migraine as opposed to tension-type headache
[26]. Some patients with vestibular disease may
show higher motion sickness susceptibility to optic
flow [27]. A telephone survey suggested that
patients with Menieres disease had elevated
motion sickness susceptibility compared with controls but not as elevated as patients with vestibular
migraine [28].
1350-7540 Copyright 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
www.co-neurology.com
85
&&
&
&
&&
&&
&&
&&
&&
&&
&&
86
www.co-neurology.com
PHARMACOLOGICAL
COUNTERMEASURES
Drugs currently used against motion sickness were
identified over 40 years ago [1 ]. They may be divided
into the following categories: antimuscarinics (e.g.,
scopolamine), H1 antihistamines (e.g., dimenhydrinate), and sympathomimetics (e.g., amphetamine).
Combinations for example scopolamine and dexamphetamine are highly effective since both drugs
combine their different antimotion sickness properties and their respective side-effects of sedation
and stimulation cancel each other out. However,
&&
&&
Acknowledgements
None.
Financial support and sponsorship
None.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
&&
CONCLUSION
Main advances in recent years have been in identifying brain mechanisms and loci that are associated
with motion sickness and/or nausea. Similarly,
although motion sickness is polysymptomatic,
1. Golding JF, Gresty MA. Motion sickness and disorientation in vehicles. In:
Adolfo M, editor. Bronstein Oxford textbook of vertigo and imbalance. Oxford,
UK: Oxford University Press; 2013. pp. 293305.
A comprehensive and partially historical review extending to more general disorientation.
2. Lawson BD. MS symptomatology and origins. In: Handbook of virtual en&
vironments: design, implementation, and applications. 2nd ed. New York, NY:
CRC Press; 2014; pp. 531599.
Highlights significant soporific effect of motion sickness.
3. Matsangas P, McCauley ME. Yawning as a behavioral marker of mild MS and
&
sopite syndrome. Aviat Space Environ Med 2014; 85:658661.
Highlights significant soporific effect of motion sickness and possible objective
markers.
4. Koch KL. Gastric dysrhythmias: a potential objective measure of nausea. Exp
Brain Res 2014; 232:25532561.
5. Schaub N, Ng K, Kuo P, et al. Gastric and lower esophageal sphincter
&
pressures during nausea: a study using visual motion-induced nausea and
high-resolution manometry. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2014;
306:G741G747.
Demonstrates the value of modern internal monitoring technique.
6. Schutz L, Zak D, Holmes JF. Pattern of passenger injury and illness
&&
on expedition cruise ships to Antarctica. J Travel Med 2014; 21:228
234.
A large study that also quantified the relative importance of motion sickness
compared to other common disorders.
7. Perrin P, Lion A, Bosser G, et al. MS in rally car co-drivers. Aviat Space Environ
Med 2013; 84:473477.
8. Clement G, Wood SJ. Eye movements and motion perception during offvertical axis rotation after spaceflight. J Vestib Res 2013; 23:1322.
9. Keshavarz B, Hettinger LJ, Vena D, Campos JL. Combined effects of auditory
and visual cues on the perception of vection. Exp Brain Res 2014;
232:827836.
10. Koslucher FC, Haaland EJ, Stoffregen TA. Body load and the postural
precursors of MS. Gait Posture 2014; 39:606610.
11. Naqvi SA, Badruddin N, Malik AS, et al. Does 3D produce more symptoms
&
of visually induced MS? Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2013;
2013:64056408.
Highlights the implication of new visual technologies for motion sickness.
&&
1350-7540 Copyright 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
www.co-neurology.com
87
88
www.co-neurology.com