Case Report: Conservative Treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Can Alter the Perception of Verticality. A Preliminary Study

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a lateral curvature of the spine of at least 10° Cobb's angle of unknown etiology. Some studies have found that patients with AIS have a Visual Verticality (VV) perception similar to healthy controls. This study aimed to analyze VV perception and postural balance differences in patients with AIS depending on the management, either based on observation or conservative treatment. Eighteen patients with AIS were included in this study. Nine patients were managed based on observation. The other nine underwent conservative treatment, such as bracing or exercise. Subjective Visual Vertical (SVV) and posturographic parameters were measured and analyzed. In the SVV test, patients who underwent treatment showed poor constant error in absolute values and mean absolute error, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). Only the Romberg Quotient for sway area was within the limits of statistical significance for posturographic parameters, with a lower value for patients under observation. This study found worse perception of verticality in patients receiving some type of conservative treatment than patients receiving only observation; whereas posturography showed similar values in both observation and treatment groups. Our results can be interpreted as the effect of treatment on the previous verticality perception adapted to the curvature.

Multisensory Interactions in Head and Body Centered Perception of Verticality

Percepts of verticality are thought to be constructed as a weighted average of multisensory inputs, but the observed weights differ considerably between studies. In the present study, we evaluate whether this can be explained by differences in how visual, somatosensory and proprioceptive cues contribute to representations of the Head In Space (HIS) and Body In Space (BIS). Participants (10) were standing on a force plate on top of a motion platform while wearing a visualization device that allowed us to artificially tilt their visual surroundings. They were presented with (in)congruent combinations of visual, platform, and head tilt, and performed Rod & Frame Test (RFT) and Subjective Postural Vertical (SPV) tasks. We also recorded postural responses to evaluate the relation between perception and balance. The perception data shows that body tilt, head tilt, and visual tilt affect the HIS and BIS in both experimental tasks. For the RFT task, visual tilt induced considerable biases (≈ 10° for 36° visual tilt) in the direction of the vertical expressed in the visual scene; for the SPV task, participants also adjusted platform tilt to correct for illusory body tilt induced by the visual stimuli, but effects were much smaller (≈ 0.25°). Likewise, postural data from the SPV task indicate participants slightly shifted their weight to counteract visual tilt (0.3° for 36° visual tilt). The data reveal a striking dissociation of visual effects between the two tasks. We find that the data can be explained well using a model where percepts of the HIS and BIS are constructed from direct signals from head and body sensors, respectively, and indirect signals based on body and head signals but corrected for perceived neck tilt. These findings show that perception of the HIS and BIS derive from the same sensory signals, but see profoundly different weighting factors. We conclude that observations of different weightings between studies likely result from querying of distinct latent constructs referenced to the body or head in space.

New Mobile Device to Measure Verticality Perception: Results in Young Subjects with Headaches

The subjective visual vertical (SVV) test has been frequently used to measure vestibular contribution to the perception of verticality. Recently, mobile devices have been used to efficiently perform this measurement. The aim of this study was to analyze the perception of verticality in subjects with migraines and headaches. A cross-sectional study was conducted that included 28 patients with migraine, 74 with tension-type headache (TTH), and 93 healthy subjects. The SVV test was used through a new virtual reality system. The mean absolute error (MAE) of degrees deviation was also measured to qualify subjects as positive when it was greater than 2.5°. No differences in the prevalence of misperception in verticality was found among healthy subjects (31.18%), migraineurs (21.43%), or those with TTH (33.78%) (p = 0.480). The MAE was not significantly different between the three groups (migraine = 1.36°, TTH = 1.61°, and healthy = 1.68°) (F = 1.097, p = 0.336, and η2 = 0.011). The perception of verticality could not be explained by any variable usually related to headaches. No significant differences exist in the vestibular contribution to the perception of verticality between patients with headaches and healthy subjects. New tests measuring visual and somatosensory contribution should be used to analyze the link between the perception of verticality and headaches.

Visual Verticality Perception in Spinal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Patients diagnosed with traumatic or non-traumatic spinal pain and idiopathic scoliosis frequently suffer from imbalance. The evaluation of the perception of verticality by means of visual tests emerges as a quick and easy tool for clinical management of the balance disorders. Several studies have assessed the visual perception of verticality in spinal diseases obtaining controversial results. The aim of our study is to analyze the perception of visual verticality in subjects with several spinal diseases in comparison with healthy subjects. A meta-analysis was carried out. PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, WoS, CINAHL, and SciELO databases were searched until January 2020. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated to analyze differences between patients and healthy controls. Fifteen studies with a total of 2052 patients were included. In comparison with healthy subjects, a misperception of verticality was found in patients with spinal pain when the perception of the verticality was assessed with the rod and frame test (SMD = 0.339; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.181, 0.497; p < 0.001). It seems that the perception of visual verticality is not altered in patients with idiopathic scoliosis (p = 0.294). The present meta-analysis shows a misperception of visual verticality only in patients with spinal pain.

Altered Visual and Proprioceptive Spatial Perception in Individuals with Parkinson’s Disease

Difficulties in the integration of visual, vestibular, and somatosensory information in individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) may alter perception of verticality. Accordingly, in this cross-sectional study, we analyzed PD patients’ ( n = 13) subjective visual vertical (SVV) and subjective haptic vertical (SHV) perceptions and compared them to those of healthy controls ( n = 14). We compared SVV and SHV findings among participants with PD, healthy controls, and cutoff points of normality based on prior research literature, using the parametric nonpaired t test (at p < .05) and Cohen’s d (at d > 0.8) to determine clinical relevance. We analyzed SVV with the bucket test and SHV with the rod rotations task in clockwise and counterclockwise directions. We calculated Pearson correlations to analyze the association between verticality tests and the most clinically affected body side. We calculated both the percentage of A-effect (expression of body tilt underestimation to the midline) and E-effect (expression of body tilt overestimation in the upright position). Individuals with PD showed greater variability in right SHV supination compared to the healthy control participants ( p = .002). There was greater clinical relevance in right (as opposed to left) SVV ( d = 0.83), right (as opposed to left) SHV pronation ( d = 0.91), and left (as opposed to right) SHV pronation ( d = 0.88). We observed a higher proportion of E-effect in individuals with PD. A significantly higher proportion of patients with PD, compared to patients in past literature, had right SHV pronation ( p = .001), left SHV pronation ( p = .023), right SHV supination ( p = .001), left SHV supination ( p = .046), and left SHV pronation ( p = .046). Thus, subjective visual and proprioceptive perception of verticality is altered in patients with PD, compared to individuals without PD.