{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030990173847316706, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017384731670445956, 'mean_word_length': 4.807017543859649, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Validity of a new feedback method for the VEMP test

Conclusions. We used a feedback method, based on a blood pressure manometer with inflatable cuff, to control the sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM) contraction. To obtain comparable left-right VEMP responses, it is necessary (1) to determine which cuff pressures on both sides yield identical mean rectified voltage (MRV) values of the SCM contraction and (2) to apply these cuff pressures during the VEMP test. Objective. To investigate the ffect of the SCM muscle contraction variability on the VEMP variables when applying the feedback method. Materials and methods. Subjects pushed with their jaw against the hand-held inflated cuff to generate cuff pressures of subsequently 30, 40 and 50 mmHg during a MRV and VEMP measurement. Results. When analyzing the relationship between the applied cuff pressures and the MRV values/VEMP amplitudes, we showed that (1) there was a linear relationship, (2) there was no side effect and (3) there was an interaction effect between ‘side’ and ‘subject’. There was neither a side effect, nor an effect of the applied cuff pressure when considering the p13 latencies. As for the n23 values, there was no side effect but there was a significant difference when comparing the n23 latencies at cuff pressures of 30 vs 40 mmHg/50 mmHg.