Normative Ranges for Oculomotor and Reaction Time Tests in U.S. Military Service Members and Veterans.

Abstract

Oculomotor and reaction time tests are frequently used assessments of vestibular symptoms, traumatic brain injury (TBI), or other neurological disorders in both clinical and research contexts. When interpreting these tests it is important to have a reference interval (RI) as a comparison for what constitutes a typical/expected response; however, the current body of research has only limited information regarding normative ranges calculated according to established standards or for a military-specific sample. The purpose of the present study was to describe RIs for oculomotor and reaction time tests in a cohort of service members and veterans (SMVs) for use as comparators by clinicians and scientists. Descriptive. Participants were prospectively enrolled in the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center-Traumatic Brain Injury Center of Excellence 15-year Longitudinal Traumatic Brain Injury Study. Only SMVs without a history of TBI or blast exposure were included in the RI calculations. The test paradigms included in this analysis were: smooth pursuit, prosaccades, antisaccades, saccades and reaction time, predictive saccades, optokinetic nystagmus, auditory reaction time, and visual reaction time. Nonparametric methods, based on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's recognized consensus standards, were used to calculate 95% RIs. A comparison between the calculated RIs and those available from previously published research is provided. Summary statistics and RIs were calculated for 47 outcome parameters from 13 oculomotor and reaction time tests. Sample sizes and age ranges varied across outcome parameters depending on the availability of reference values for RI calculations. The sample sizes used to calculate RIs ranged from 51 to 69. The age of SMVs included in each RI ranged from 19 to 61 years with mean ages ranging from 37 to 39 years. Similarities/differences between the RIs in the present study and those in previously published research are highly dependent on the outcome parameter; however, in general, the RIs in the present study tended to be somewhat wider. The RIs provided in this paper can serve as comparisons for clinicians and scientists who are utilizing these oculomotor and reaction time testing paradigms in similar cohorts of patients or research participants.