INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN SUSCEPTIBILITY TO MOTION SICKNESS AMONG 6 SKYLAB ASTRONAUTS
INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN SUSCEPTIBILITY TO MOTION SICKNESS AMONG 6 SKYLAB ASTRONAUTS
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/0094-5765(75)90051-x
复制
发表时间：
1975-01-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
HOMICK, JL
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
GRAYBIEL, A;MILLER, EF;HOMICK, JL
天空实验室的一个实验是关于晕动病的，比较了高空工作室中的易感性和飞行前和飞行后的易感性。在任务第8天（MD 8）和之后进行了测试，到那时宇航员已经适应了工作条件。压力加速度是通过要求宇航员在眼睛被遮住的情况下，在可以以高达30 rpm的角速度旋转的椅子上执行标准化的头部运动（前、后、左、右）而产生的。选择的终点是150次离散的头部运动或非常轻微的运动病。在所有的高空旋转试验中，五名受试宇航员（宇航员1号没有参加）几乎没有出现症状，因此表明在高空的敏感性低于在地面上进行的飞行前和飞行后试验，因为在地面上总是会出现症状。由于眼睛被遮住，而且在高处和在地面上对泪小管的刺激是一样的，看来，由于重力而对耳石器官的刺激是降低对运动病敏感性的一个重要因素，即使在试验条件下产生的瞬时刺激是大量的和不正常的。一些宇航员在高空或之后的操作条件下经历了运动病溅落，但注意力主要集中在零重力下表现出的症状。Skylab-II机组人员（1至3名宇航员）都没有在高空晕车。Skylab-III号机组人员中的第6名宇航员（第4至6名宇航员）在进入轨道后一小时内出现了晕动病;这是有记录以来在轨道飞行条件下最早的此类诊断。诱发刺激与头部和身体运动有关，宇航员6号通过避免这种运动和一剂1-东莨菪碱0.35毫克+d-安非他明5.0毫克的药物组合获得了缓解。Skylab-III的所有三名宇航员都在工作室经历了晕动病，其中宇航员6最容易受到影响，宇航员4最不容易受到影响。与SL-II机组人员相比，SL-III机组人员在车间中的易感性更高，这可能是因为他们在指挥舱中的时间不到SL-II机组人员的三分之一。在工作室的开放空间中允许的不自然的运动，往往类似于杂技，揭示了失重状态下产生异常或不寻常的前庭和视觉刺激的复杂相互作用的巨大潜力。通过身体约束和药物控制了症状，但对运动病的高度敏感性持续了3天，可能更长; MD 7时完全恢复。从上述陈述可以清楚地看出，在MD 8时和之后，SL-II和SL-III机组人员对运动病的敏感性在实验条件下是不可区分的。在MD 8之前获得适应效应所起的作用不太清楚，是一个有待讨论的问题。
One of the Skylab experiments dealt with motion sickness, comparing susceptibility in the workshop aloft with susceptibility preflight and postflight. Tests were conducted on and after mission-day 8 (MD 8) by which time the astronauts were adapted to working conditions. Stressful accelerations were generated by requiring the astronauts, with eyes covered, to execute standardized head movements (front, back, left, and right) while in a chair that could be rotated at angular velocities up to 30 rpm. The selected endpoint was either 150 discrete head movements or a very mild level of motion sickness. In all rotation experiments aloft, the five astronauts tested (astronaut 1 did not participate) were virtually symptom free, thus demonstrating lower susceptibility aloft than in preflight and postflight tests on the ground when symptoms were always elicited. Inasmuch as the eyes were covered and the canalicular stimuli were the same aloft as on the ground, it would appear that lifting the stimulus to the otolith organs due to gravity was an important factor in reducing susceptibility to motion sickness even though the transient stimuli generated under the test conditions were substantial and abnormal in pattern.Some of the astronauts experienced motion sickness under operational conditions aloft or after splashdown, but attention is centered chiefly on symptoms manifested in zero gravity. None of the Skylab—II crew (astronauts 1 to 3) was motion sick aloft. Astronaut 6 of the Skylab—III crew (astronauts 4 to 6) experienced motion sickness within an hour after transition into orbit; this constitutes the earliest such diagnosis on record under orbital flight conditions. The eliciting stimuli were associated with head and body movements, and astronaut 6 obtained relief by avoiding such movements and by one dose of the drug combination 1-scopolamine 0.35 mg + d-amphetamine 5.0 mg. All three astronauts of Skylab—III experienced motion sickness in the workshop where astronaut 6 was most susceptible and astronaut 4, least susceptible. The higher susceptibility of SL-III crewmen in the workshop, as compared with SL-II crewmen, may be attributable to the fact that they were based in the command module less than one-third as long as SL-II crewmen. The unnatural movements, often resembling acrobatics, permitted in the open spaces of the workshop revealed the great potentialities in weightlessness for generating complex interactions of abnormal or unusual vestibular and visual stimuli. Symptoms were controlled by body restraint and by drugs, but high susceptibility to motion sickness persisted for 3 days and probably much longer; restoration was complete on MD 7.From the foregoing statements it is clear that on and after MD 8 the susceptibility of SL-II and SL-III crewmen to motion sickness under experimental conditions was indistinguishable. The role played by the acquisition of adaptation effects prior to MD 8 is less clear and is a subject to be discussed.