Clinical Saccadometry: Establishing Evaluative Standards Using a Simplified Video Oculography Protocol in the Adult Population

  SFX Search  Permissions and Reprints Abstract

Background Saccadometry is an advanced ocular motor test battery that allows for the functional evaluation of the varied brain regions and circuits involved in the generation of fast, purposeful, and accurate saccadic eye movements. The test battery is composed of prosaccade (PS) and antisaccade (AS) tests that progressively increase cognitive demand. Existing saccadometry protocols qualitatively describe trends across the lifespan, but have not been widely adopted by clinicians.

Purpose The aims of this study are to design an efficient and simplified clinical saccadometry protocol using video oculography (VOG) equipment and establish associated evaluative standards across the lifespan.

Study Sample Data were reported on 273 adults ages 18 to 69 years.

Results Evaluative data on four measures: directional error rate (DE), latency (Lat), peak velocity (Vel), and accuracy (Acc) during PS and AS measurements were provided. Age-group differences were found in Lat (p < 0.01) and Vel (p = 0.04) during PS and age-group differences were found in DE (p = 0.04), Lat (p < 0.01) and Vel (p < 0.01) during AS. Gender differences were found in DE (p = 0.01) and Lat (p < 0.01) during AS.

Conclusions This study established a standardized and time-efficient protocol with evaluative standards for individuals ages 18 to 69 years old to enable the use of saccadometry as an objective measure in the clinic. Saccadometry allows clinicians to look beyond the traditional saccade test and evaluate complex oculomotor and cognitive functions that will better help clinicians differentiate between peripheral and central diagnoses.

Keywords saccadometry - evaluative standards - antisaccade - prosaccade - directional error - saccade - oculomotor Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.


Author Contributions

Daniel Demian, Michelle Petrak, Glen Zielinski, Shelly Massingale, Liz Fuemmeler, and Amy Alexander collected and charted data. Chia-Cheng Lin provided the statistical analysis. All authors reviewed the text and approved the final paper for submission.

Publication History

Received: 16 September 2022

Accepted: 13 December 2022

Article published online:
21 November 2023

© 2023. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif