Physical Therapy Rehabilitation Science

korean Academy of Physical Therapy Rehabilitation Science (물리치료재활과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of mobile texting and gaming on gait with obstructions under different illumination levels

  • Cha, Jaeyun (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Sahmyook Seoul Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Hyunjin (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital) ;
  • Park, Jaemyoung (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Seoul Medical Center) ;
  • Song, Changho (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Welfare, Sahmyook University)
  • Received : 2015.05.06
  • Accepted : 2015.05.28
  • Published : 2015.06.26
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to test the effects of mobile texting and gaming on gait with obstructions under different illumination levels. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Twelve healthy adults aged 20 to 36 years (mean 23.5 years) were tested under six different conditions. All participants used touchscreen smartphones. Testing conditions included: 1) Walking with an obstruction under a bright illumination level; 2) walking with an obstruction with a low level of illumination; 3) walking with an obstruction while texting under a bright illumination level; 4) walking with an obstruction while texting with a low level of illumination; 5) walking with an obstruction while gaming under a bright illumination level; and 6) walking with an obstruction while gaming with a low level of illumination. All participants were asked to text the Korean national anthem by their own phone and play Temple Run 2 using an iPhone 5. Gait variances were measured over a distance of 3 m, and the mean value after three trials was used. A gait analyzer was used to measure the data. Results: Compared to normal gait with obstruction, gait speed, step length, stride length, step time, stride time, cadence while texting and gaming showed significant differences (p<0.05). Differences between the illumination levels included gait speed, step length, stride length, and step time (p<0.05) with no significant differences in stride time and cadence. Conclusions: Dual-tasking using a smartphone under low levels of illumination lowers the quality of gait with obstructions.

Keywords

References

  1. Schabrun SM, van den Hoorn W, Moorcroft A, Greenland C, Hodges PW. Texting and walking: strategies for postural control and implications for safety. PLoS One 2014;9:e84312. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084312
  2. Stavrinos D, Byington KW, Schwebel DC. Distracted walking: cell phones increase injury risk for college pedestrians. J Safety Res 2011;42:101-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2011.01.004
  3. Nasar J, Hecht P, Wener R. Mobile telephones, distracted attention, and pedestrian safety. Accid Anal Prev 2008;40:69-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2007.04.005
  4. Bungum TJ, Day C, Henry LJ. The association of distraction and caution displayed by pedestrians at a lighted crosswalk. J Community Health 2005;30:269-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-005-3705-4
  5. Hatfield J, Murphy S. The effects of mobile phone use on pedestrian crossing behaviour at signalized and unsignalized intersections. Accid Anal Prev 2007;39:197-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.07.001
  6. Neider MB, McCarley JS, Crowell JA, Kaczmarski H, Kramer AF. Pedestrians, vehicles, and cell phones. Accid Anal Prev 2010;42:589-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.10.004
  7. Schwebel DC, Stavrinos D, Byington KW, Davis T, O'Neal EE, de Jong D. Distraction and pedestrian safety: how talking on the phone, texting, and listening to music impact crossing the street. Accid Anal Prev 2012;45:266-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2011.07.011
  8. Rubinstein JS, Meyer DE, Evans JE. Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2001;27:763-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.4.763
  9. Langer P, Holzner B, Magnet W, Kopp M. Hands-free mobile phone conversation impairs the peripheral visual system to an extent comparable to an alcohol level of 4-5 g 100 ml. Hum Psychopharmacol 2005;20:65-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/hup.654
  10. Woollacott M, Shumway-Cook A. Attention and the control of posture and gait: a review of an emerging area of research. Gait Posture 2002;16:1-14.
  11. Kahneman D. Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1973. p. 246.
  12. Lamberg EM, Muratori LM. Cell phones change the way we walk. Gait Posture 2012;35:688-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.12.005
  13. Boisgontier MP, Beets IA, Duysens J, Nieuwboer A, Krampe RT, Swinnen SP. Age-related differences in attentional cost associated with postural dual tasks: increased recruitment of generic cognitive resources in older adults. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2013;37:1824-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.07.014
  14. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M, Kerns KA, Baldwin M. The effects of two types of cognitive tasks on postural stability in older adults with and without a history of falls. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1997;52:M232-40.
  15. Weerdesteyn V, Schillings AM, van Galen GP, Duysens J. Distraction affects the performance of obstacle avoidance during walking. J Mot Behav 2003;35:53-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222890309602121
  16. Weerdesteyn V, Nienhuis B, Hampsink B, Duysens J. Gait adjustments in response to an obstacle are faster than voluntary reactions. Hum Mov Sci 2004;23:351-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2004.08.011
  17. Byrne JM, Prentice SD. Swing phase kinetics and kinematics of knee replacement patients during obstacle avoidance. Gait Posture 2003;18:95-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(02)00164-9
  18. Lamoureux E, Sparrow WA, Murphy A, Newton RU. The effects of improved strength on obstacle negotiation in community-living older adults. Gait Posture 2003;17:273-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(02)00101-7
  19. Rietdyk S, Rhea CK. Control of adaptive locomotion: effect of visual obstruction and visual cues in the environment. Exp Brain Res 2006;169:272-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-005-0345-y
  20. Hallemans A, Ortibus E, Meire F, Aerts P. Low vision affects dynamic stability of gait. Gait Posture 2010;32:547-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.07.018
  21. Patla AE, Greig M. Any way you look at it, successful obstacle negotiation needs visually guided on-line foot placement regulation during the approach phase. Neurosci Lett 2006;397:110-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2005.12.016
  22. Lee MM, Song CH, Lee KJ, Jung SW, Shin DC, Shin SH. Concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the OPTOGait Photoelectric cell system for the assessment of spatio-temporal parameters of the gait of young adults. J Phys Ther Sci 2014;26:81-5. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.26.81
  23. Morioka S, Hiyamizu M, Yagi F. The effects of an attentional demand tasks on standing posture control. J Physiol Anthropol Appl Human Sci 2005;24:215-9. https://doi.org/10.2114/jpa.24.215
  24. Pellecchia GL, Shockley K, Turvey MT. Concurrent cognitive task modulates coordination dynamics. Cogn Sci 2005;29:531-57. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_12
  25. Lundin-Olsson L, Nyberg L, Gustafson Y. Attention, frailty, and falls: the effect of a manual task on basic mobility. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46:758-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1998.tb03813.x
  26. Chen HC, Schultz AB, Ashton-Miller JA, Giordani B, Alexander NB, Guire KE. Stepping over obstacles: dividing attention impairs performance of old more than young adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1996;51:M116-22.
  27. Catena RD, van Donkelaar P, Chou LS. Cognitive task effects on gait stability following concussion. Exp Brain Res 2007;176:23-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0596-2
  28. Siu KC, Lugade V, Chou LS, van Donkelaar P, Woollacott MH. Dual-task interference during obstacle clearance in healthy and balance-impaired older adults. Aging Clin Exp Res 2008;20:349-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03324867
  29. MacLellan MJ, Patla AE. Adaptations of walking pattern on a compliant surface to regulate dynamic stability. Exp Brain Res 2006;173:521-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0399-5
  30. Marigold DS, Patla AE. Age-related changes in gait for multi-surface terrain. Gait Posture 2008;27:689-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2007.09.005
  31. Helbostad JL, Vereijken B, Hesseberg K, Sletvold O. Altered vision destabilizes gait in older persons. Gait Posture 2009;30:233-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.05.004
  32. Austin GP, Garrett GE, Bohannon RW. Kinematic analysis of obstacle clearance during locomotion. Gait Posture 1999;10:109-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(99)00022-3
  33. Reynolds RF, Day BL. Visual guidance of the human foot during a step. J Physiol 2005;569:677-84. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2005.095869
  34. Chamberlin ME, Fulwider BD, Sanders SL, Medeiros JM. Does fear of falling influence spatial and temporal gait parameters in elderly persons beyond changes associated with normal aging? J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2005;60:1163-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/60.9.1163
  35. Demura S, Uchiyama M. Influence of cell phone email use on characteristics of gait. Eur J Sport Sci 2009;9:303-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461390902853069
  36. Harbluk JL, Noy YI, Trbovich PL, Eizenman M. An on-road assessment of cognitive distraction: impacts on drivers' visual behavior and braking performance. Accid Anal Prev 2007;39:372-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.08.013
  37. Ebersbach G, Dimitrijevic MR, Poewe W. Influence of concurrent tasks on gait: a dual-task approach. Percept Mot Skills 1995;81:107-13. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1995.81.1.107
  38. Hallemans A, Beccu S, Van Loock K, Ortibus E, Truijen S, Aerts P. Visual deprivation leads to gait adaptations that are age- and context-specific: II. Kinematic parameters. Gait Posture 2009;30:307-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.05.017
  39. Hollands MA, Marple-Horvat DE. Visually guided stepping under conditions of step cycle-related denial of visual information. Exp Brain Res 1996;109:343-56.
  40. Jahn K, Strupp M, Schneider E, Dieterich M, Brandt T. Visually induced gait deviations during different locomotion speeds. Exp Brain Res 2001;141:370-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002210100884
  41. Rhea CK, Rietdyk S. Visual exteroceptive information provided during obstacle crossing did not modify the lower limb trajectory. Neurosci Lett 2007;418:60-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2007.02.063
  42. Patla AE, Davies TC, Niechwiej E. Obstacle avoidance during locomotion using haptic information in normally sighted humans. Exp Brain Res 2004;155:173-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1714-z
  43. Moe-Nilssen R, Helbostad JL, Akra T, Birdedal L, Nygaard HA. Modulation of gait during visual adaptation to dark. J Mot Behav 2006;38:118-25. https://doi.org/10.3200/JMBR.38.2.118-125
  44. Elliott DB, Bullimore MA, Patla AE, Whitaker D. Effect of a cataract simulation on clinical and real world vision. Br J Ophthalmol 1996;80:799-804. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.80.9.799
  45. Iosa M, Fusco A, Morone G, Paolucci S. Walking there: environmental influence on walking-distance estimation. Behav Brain Res 2012;226:124-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.09.007
  46. Choi JS, Kang DW, Shin YH, Tack GR. Differences in gait pattern between the elderly and the young during level walking under low illumination. Acta Bioeng Biomech 2014;16:3-9.
  47. Rosengren KS, McAuley E, Mihalko SL. Gait adjustments in older adults: activity and efficacy influences. Psychol Aging 1998;13:375-86. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.13.3.375
  48. Gill J, Allum JH, Carpenter MG, Held-Ziolkowska M, Adkin AL, Honegger F, et al. Trunk sway measures of postural stability during clinical balance tests: effects of age. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56:M438-47. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/56.7.M438
  49. Speers RA, Kuo AD, Horak FB. Contributions of altered sensation and feedback responses to changes in coordination of postural control due to aging. Gait Posture 2002;16:20-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(02)00003-6
  50. Paquet N, Lajoie Y, Rainville C, Sabagh-Yazdi F. Effect of navigation direction on the dual-task of counting backward during blind navigation. Neurosci Lett 2008;442:148-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2008.07.002

Cited by

  1. Possibility of Using Entropy Method to Evaluate the Distracting Effect of Mobile Phones on Pedestrians vol.18, pp.11, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/e18110390
  2. What affects gait performance during walking while texting? A comparison of motor, visual and cognitive factors pp.1366-5847, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1493153
  3. Cognitively Demanding Object Negotiation While Walking and Texting vol.8, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-36230-5
  4. Modelling distracted agents in crowd simulations vol.37, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-020-01969-4