Literature DB >> 22618593

Patients with central visual field loss adopt a cautious gait strategy during tasks that present a high risk of falling.

Matthew A Timmis1, Shahina Pardhan.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate how patients with central visual field loss (CFL) complete adaptive gait tasks when compared to visual normals and determine whether task difficulty significantly affects movement control.
METHODS: Ten patients with CFL and 12 visual normals negotiated a floor-based obstacle (of different heights, 5 and 10 cm) and also walked across an unobstructed laboratory (no obstacle present). Analysis assessed the kinematics of human movement for each task.
RESULTS: During obstacle crossing, compared to visual normals, patients with CFL lifted their lead and trail foot significantly higher to avoid the obstacle, reduced horizontal crossing velocity (only significant at low obstacle height), and increased head flexion to look down at more immediate areas of the ground (P < 0.05). During the walking only trials there was no significant difference between the two groups in any of the kinematic measures. CONCLUSIONS; Compared to visual normals, patients with CFL adopt a cautious gait strategy during tasks that present a high risk of falling, such as obstacle crossing. However, under conditions that present a low risk of tripping or falling, such as level walking, differences appear minimal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22618593     DOI: 10.1167/iovs.12-9897

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  7 in total

1.  Sensorimotor integration of vision and proprioception for obstacle crossing in ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Raza Naseem Malik; Rachel Cote; Tania Lam
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Cutaneous reflex modulation during obstacle avoidance under conditions of normal and degraded visual input.

Authors:  Daniel S Marigold; Andrew J Chang; Kim Lajoie
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-05-16       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Effects of acute peripheral/central visual field loss on standing balance.

Authors:  Caitlin O'Connell; Arash Mahboobin; Scott Drexler; Mark S Redfern; Subashan Perera; Amy C Nau; Rakié Cham
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  A low-cost 2-D video system can accurately and reliably assess adaptive gait kinematics in healthy and low vision subjects.

Authors:  Tjerk Zult; Jonathan Allsop; Juan Tabernero; Shahina Pardhan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Topical Review: Assessment of Binocular Sensory Processes in Low Vision.

Authors:  Janelle Tong; Jessie Huang; Vincent Khou; Jodi Martin; Michael Kalloniatis; Angelica Ly
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 2.106

6.  Remaining visual field and preserved subjective visual functioning prevent mental distress in patients with visual field defects.

Authors:  Carolin Gall; Doreen Brösel; Bernhard A Sabel
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  The effects of temporal pressure on obstacle negotiation and gaze behaviour in young adults with simulated vision loss.

Authors:  Tjerk Zult; Jonathan Allsop; Matthew A Timmis; Shahina Pardhan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.