Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024 Oct;95(10):741-748. doi: 10.3357/AMHP.6481.2024.
Habituation to motion has therapeutic applications for motion sickness desensitization and rehabilitation of patients with vestibular disease. Less attention has been devoted to the opposite process: sensitization.
Subjects (N = 50) were randomly allocated to four sequences: Baseline visual stimulus; then 15 min of time gap; cross-coupled motion (C-C) or a Control condition; then a time gap of 15 min or 2 h; then a retest visual stimulus. Motion exposures were for 10 min or until moderate nausea, whichever was sooner. The visual stimulus was a scene rotating in yaw at 0.2 Hz with superimposed "wobble". C-C was whole-body rotation on a turntable with eight 45° head tilts during each 30-s period. Control was head tilt without rotation. Rotational velocity was incremented in staircase steps of 3° · s-1 every 30 s.
Groups were equivalent for Total Motion Sickness Symptom scores elicited by the first visual stimulus (combined: mean ± SD 10.8 ± 8.4). C-C produced greater Total Symptoms (20.3 ± 6.8) than Control (3.1 ± 3.7). Subjects recovered subjectively from C-C before retest of visual stimulus. For the retest visual stimulus, Total Symptoms were higher following C-C (15.1 ± 9.0) than following Control (8.3 ± 7.1) for both the 15 min and 2 h retests. Sickness ratings (SR) mirrored these effects of C-C.
C-C motion sensitized subsequent responses to visual stimulation up to 2 h later. Sensitization of visual stimulation crossed modalities and appeared subconscious since it occurred despite subjective recovery from C-C. For some individuals, a previously relatively innocuous visual stimulus became nauseogenic on retest. The results have implications for the use of visual technologies within hours of exposure to provocative motion. Golding JF, Alund D, Gresty MA, Flynn MB. Sensitization of visually induced motion sickness by prior provocative physical motion. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024; 95(10):741-748.
习惯运动对运动病脱敏和前庭疾病患者康复具有治疗应用。相反的过程——致敏作用，受到的关注较少。
将 50 名受试者随机分配到四个序列中：基础视觉刺激；然后是 15 分钟的时间间隔；交叉耦合运动（C-C）或对照条件；然后是 15 分钟或 2 小时的时间间隔；然后进行重新测试视觉刺激。运动暴露时间为 10 分钟，或直到出现中度恶心，以先发生者为准。视觉刺激是一个在偏航方向以 0.2 Hz 旋转的场景，叠加有“晃动”。C-C 是在转台上进行全身旋转，在每个 30 秒周期内进行 8 次 45°头部倾斜。对照是不旋转的头部倾斜。旋转速度以 3°·s-1 的阶梯式递增，每 30 秒递增一次。
在第一次视觉刺激诱发的总运动病症状评分方面，各组相当（综合：10.8 ± 8.4）。C-C 引起的总症状（20.3 ± 6.8）比对照（3.1 ± 3.7）更大。在重新测试视觉刺激之前，受试者主观上从 C-C 中恢复。对于重新测试的视觉刺激，在 15 分钟和 2 小时的重新测试中，C-C 后总症状（15.1 ± 9.0）高于对照（8.3 ± 7.1）。症状评分（SR）反映了 C-C 的这些影响。
C-C 运动使随后对视觉刺激的反应致敏，直至 2 小时后。由于在从 C-C 中主观恢复的情况下仍发生致敏，因此视觉刺激的致敏作用跨越了模态，且似乎是潜意识的。对于某些人来说，以前相对无害的视觉刺激在重新测试时会引起恶心。这些结果对在接触刺激性运动后数小时内使用视觉技术产生了影响。Golding JF、Alund D、Gresty MA、Flynn MB。先前的刺激性物理运动引起的视觉诱发运动病致敏。航空航天医学与人类表现。2024；95（10）：741-748。
