Kazuhiro Hayashi1,2, Shuichi Aono1,3, Mitsuhiro Fujiwara4, Yukiko Shiro1,5, Takahiro Ushida1. 1. Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Aichi Medical University, Nagakute, Japan. 2. Department of Rehabilitation, Aichi Medical University Hospital, Nagakute, Japan. 3. Department of Pain Data Management, Aichi Medical University, Nagakute, Japan. 4. Department of Rehabilitation, Kamiiida Rehabilitation Hospital, Nagoya, Japan. 5. Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Nagoya Gakuin University, Nagoya, Japan.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: Professionals require shorter fixation durations on areas of interest than trainees, while describing a higher number of gait abnormalities.
INTRODUCTION: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: Professionals require shorter fixation durations on areas of interest than trainees, while describing a higher number of gait abnormalities.