Difference in eye movements during gait analysis between professionals and trainees.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
23
07
2019
accepted:
11
04
2020
entrez:
1
5
2020
pubmed:
1
5
2020
medline:
21
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Observational gait analysis is a widely used skill in physical therapy. Meanwhile, the skill has not been investigated using objective assessments. The present study investigated the differences in eye movement between professionals and trainees, while observing gait analysis. The participants included in this study were 26 professional physical therapists and 26 physical therapist trainees. The participants, wearing eye tracker systems, were asked to describe gait abnormalities of a patient as much as possible. The eye movement parameters of interest were fixation count, average fixation duration, and total fixation duration. The number of gait abnormalities described was significantly higher in professionals than in trainees, overall and in limbs of the patient. The fixation count was significantly higher in professionals when compared to trainees. Additionally, the average fixation duration and total fixation duration were significantly shorter in professionals. Conversely, in trunks, the number of gait abnormalities and eye movements showed no significant differences between groups. Professionals require shorter fixation durations on areas of interest than trainees, while describing a higher number of gait abnormalities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32353030
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232246
pii: PONE-D-19-20784
pmc: PMC7192381
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0232246Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
PLoS One. 2013 Jun 13;8(6):e66169
pubmed: 23785481
Med Phys. 2013 Oct;40(10):101906
pubmed: 24089908
Phys Ther. 2013 Dec;93(12):1673-85
pubmed: 23813091
Surg Endosc. 2010 Oct;24(10):2458-64
pubmed: 20333405
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005 Mar 17;6:17
pubmed: 15774012
J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2018 Jul;5(3):031402
pubmed: 29250569
J Surg Res. 2014 Sep;191(1):169-78
pubmed: 24881471
J Biomed Inform. 2017 Feb;66:171-179
pubmed: 28087402
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 01;9(8):e103447
pubmed: 25084012
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Jan;97(1):131-40
pubmed: 26254954
Am J Surg. 2014 Feb;207(2):187-93
pubmed: 24476801
Surg Endosc. 2012 Dec;26(12):3536-40
pubmed: 22733194
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2012 Nov;2(6):507-15
pubmed: 22696449
Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2018 Apr;65:176-190
pubmed: 28606763
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015 Apr;51(2):171-84
pubmed: 25184798
Front Psychol. 2018 Oct 16;9:1972
pubmed: 30459676
Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2012 Mar;16(2):161-6
pubmed: 21862371
Phys Ther. 1966 Apr;46(4):357-75
pubmed: 5907254
Iperception. 2011;2(6):592-610
pubmed: 23145248
Behav Res Methods. 2011 Dec;43(4):987-98
pubmed: 21557008
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2005 Dec;15(6):575-80
pubmed: 16366861
Med Teach. 2018 Jan;40(1):62-69
pubmed: 29172823
Radiology. 2014 Dec;273(3):783-92
pubmed: 25028782