Heart Rate Variability and Motion Sickness During Forklift Simulator Driving

• Autorzy: Zużewicz K. , Saulewicz A. , Konarska M. , Kaczorowski Z.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The goal of the study was to determine the effect of a 1-h hour long forklift truck virtual simulator driving on the mechanism of autonomic heart rate (HR) regulation in operators. The participants were divided into 2 subgroups: subjects with no definite inclination to motion sickness (group A) and subjects with a definite inclination to motion sickness (group B). Holter monitoring of electrocardiogram (ECG) signal was carried out in all subjects during the virtual simulator driving. For 12 consecutive epochs of ECG signal, HR variability analysis was conducted in time and frequency domains. In subjects with a definite inclination to motion sickness after ~30 min of the driving, changes in parameter values were found indicating an increase in sympathetic and parasympathetic activity with parasympathetic dominance.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

motion sickness; heart rate variability; spectral analysis; forklift truck virtual simulator

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2011
• Tom: Vol. 17, No. 4
• Strony: 403--410
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 21 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Zużewicz K.

• Central Institute for Labour Protection – National Research Institute (CIOP-PIB), Poland

autor

Saulewicz A.

• Central Institute for Labour Protection – National Research Institute (CIOP-PIB), Poland

autor

Konarska M.

• Central Institute for Labour Protection – National Research Institute (CIOP-PIB), Poland

autor

Kaczorowski Z.

• Military Institute of Aviation Medicine, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1.Webb CM, Bass JM, Johnson DM, Kelley AM, Martin CR, Wildzunas RM. Simulator sickness in helicopter flight training school. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2009;80:541–45; discussion 546.
• 2.Khilov KL. The function of the equilibrium organ and motion sickness. Leningrad, USSR: Meditsina; 1969.
• 3.Graybiel A, Wood ChD, Miller EF, Cramer DB. Diagnostic criteria for grading the severity of acute motion sickness. Aerosp Med. 1968;39(5):453–5.
• 4.Hamilton KM, Kanto L, Magee LE. Limitations of postural equilibrium tests for examining simulator sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1989;60:246–51.
• 5.Golding JF, Arun S, Wortley E, Wotton-Hamrioui K, Cousins S, Gresty MA. Offvertical axis rotation of the visual field and nauseogenicity. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2009;80(6):516–21.
• 6.Muth ER, Walker AD, Fiorello M. Effects of uncoupled motion on performance. Hum Factors. 2006;48:600–07.
• 7.Task Force. Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. Circulation. 1996;93:1043–65.
• 8.Backs RW, Lenneman JK, Wetzel JM, Green P. Cardiac measures of driver workload during simulated driving with and without visual occlusion. Hum Factors. 2003;45(4):525-538.
• 9.Berntson GG, Cacioppo JT, Quigley KS. Autonomic determinism: the modes of autonomic control, the doctrine of autonomic space, and the laws of autonomic constraint. Psychol Rev. 1991;98(4):459–87.
• 10.Backs RW. A comparison of factor analytic methods of obtaining cardiovascular autonomic components for the assessment of mental workload. Ergonomics. 1998;41(5):733–45.
• 11.Draper MH, Viirre ES, Furness TA, Gawron VJ. Effects of image scale and system time delay on simulator sickness within head-coupled virtual environments. Hum Factors. 2001;43:129–46.
• 12.Duh HB-L, Parker DE, Philips JO, Furness TA. “Conflicting” motion cues to the visual and vestibular self-motion systems around 0.06 Hz evoke simulator sickness. Hum Factors. 2004;46:142-153.
• 13.Jeng-Weei Lin J, Parker DE, Lahav M, Furness TA. Unobtrusive vehicle motion prediction cues reduced simulator sickness during passive travel in a driving simulator. Ergonomics. 2005;48:608–24.
• 14.Bubka A, Bonato F, Palmisano S. Expanding and contracting optical flow patterns and simulator sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2007;78:383–6.
• 15.Guideline for alleviation of simulator sickness symptomatology. Naval Training System Center NAVTRASTSCEN TR-87-007. Orlando, FL, USA; 1987.
• 16.Money KE. Simulator sickness. In: Motion sickness: significance in aerospace operations and prophylaxis. AGARD—Advisory Group for Aerospace Research & Development Lecture series 1991; 175, 6B:1–3.
• 17.Griffin MJ. Physical characteristics of stimuli provoking motion sickness. In: AGARD Lecture Series. Motion Sickness: Significance in Aerospace Operations and Prophylaxis (USA). 1991.
• 18.Weiler JM, Bloomfield JR, Woodworth GG, Grant AR, Layton TA, Brown TL, et al. Effects of fexofenadine, diphenhydramine, and alcohol on driving performance. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial in the Iowa driving simulator. Ann of Intern Med. 2000;132:354–63.
• 19.Lee HC, Cameron D, Lee AH. Assessing the driving performance of older adult drivers: on road versus simulated driving. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2003;35:797–803.
• 20.Gurtman CG, Broadbear JH, Redman JR. Effects of modafinil on simulator driving and self-assessment of driving following sleep deprivation. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2008;23:681–92.
• 21.Park JR, Lim DW, Lee SY, Lee HW, Choi MH, Chung SC. Long-term study of simulator sickness: differences in EEG response due to individual sensitivity. Int J Nurosci. 2008;118:857–65.