Ann Rehabil Med.  2011 Jun;35(3):427-431. 10.5535/arm.2011.35.3.427.

Effect of Dominant Versus Non-dominant Vision in Postural Control

• Park RY
• Kee HS
• Kang JH
• Lee SJ
• Yoon SR
• Jung KI

• KMID: 2266864
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2011.35.3.427

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
To assess the effect of dominant and non-dominant vision in controlling posture in quiet stance. METHOD: Twenty-five healthy elderly subjects aged over 60 years old and twenty-five young subjects aged under 30 years old were assessed by computerized dynamic posturography. Postural stability was measured in two conditions; dominant eye open and non-dominant eye open. We used the sensory organization test (SOT) for evaluating sensory impairment. A SOT assessed the subject's ability to use and integrate somatosensory input, vision, and vestibular cues effectively to maintain balance. The SOT was conducted 3 times, and the average value of the 3 trials was used for data analysis. Equilibrium scores reflected the subject's anteroposterior sway. The highest possible score was 100, which indicated that the subject did not sway at all, and a score of 0 indicated a fall from the footplate. Determination of ocular dominance was performed by a hole-in-the card test.
RESULTS
For the twenty-five young subjects in this study, equilibrium score in two conditions did not differ. However, for elderly subjects over 60 years, the equilibrium score in dominant vision was higher than in nondominant vision (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION
In young subjects, there were no significant differences in postural control between dominant vision and non-dominant vision. However, in elderly subjects, postural control in non-dominant vision was significantly impaired. Therefore, the evaluation of a dominant eye should be considered in rehabilitation programs for elderly people.

Keyword

Postural control; Dominant vision; Non dominant vision; Balance; Elderly

MeSH Terms

Aged
Cues
Dominance, Ocular
Eye
Humans
Posture
Statistics as Topic
Vision, Ocular

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Six conditions of sensory organization test (SOT).

Reference

1. Koo BS, Cho YA. The relationship of dominant eye, dominant hand, and deviated eye in strabismus. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1996; 37:1277–1282.

2. Cohen H, Blatchly CA, Gombash LL. A study of the clinical test of sensory interaction and balance. Phys Ther. 1993; 73:346–354. PMID: 8497509.

3. Di Fabio RP. Sensitivity and specificity of platform posturography for identifying patients with vestibular dysfunction. Phys Ther. 1995; 75:290–305. PMID: 7899487.

4. Hatch J, Gill-Body KM, Portney LG. Determinants of balance confidence in community-dwelling elderly people. Phys Ther. 2003; 83:1072–1079. PMID: 14640866.

5. Umphred DA. Neurological rehabilitation. 2001. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby;p. 616–660.

6. Isotalo E, Kapoula Z, Feret PH, Gauchon K, Zamfirescu F, Gagey PM. Monocular versus binocular vision in postural control. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2004; 31:11–17. PMID: 15041048.

7. Goh EK. Clinical application of computerized dynamic posturography. J Korean Bal Soc. 2005; 4:107–118.

8. Fink WH. The dominant eye: its clinical significance. Arch Ophthal. 1938; 19:555–582.

9. Porac C, Coren S. The dominant eye. Psychol Bull. 1976; 83:880–897. PMID: 794902.

10. Mapp AP, Ono H, Barbeito R. What does the dominant eye dominate? A brief and somewhat contentious review. Percept Psychophys. 2003; 65:310–317. PMID: 12713246.

11. Coren S, Duckman RH. Ocular dominance and amblyopia. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1975; 52:47–50. PMID: 1111289.

12. Dornan J, Fernie GR, Holliday PJ. Visual input: Its importance in the control of postural sway. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1978; 59:586–591. PMID: 367311.

13. Horak FB, Nashner LM, Diener HC. Postural strategies associated with somatosensory and vestibular loss. Exp Brain Res. 1990; 82:167–177. PMID: 2257901.

14. Shin YI, Kim YH, Kim NG. A quantitative assessment of static and dynamic postural sway in normal adults. J Biomed Eng Res. 1997; 18:157–165.

15. Ishizaki H, Pyykko I, Aalto H, Starck J. Repeatability and effect of instruction of body sway. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1991; 481:589–592. PMID: 1927477.