A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Don't get tripped up: Haptic modalities alter gait characteristics during obstacle crossing. | LitMetric

Don't get tripped up: Haptic modalities alter gait characteristics during obstacle crossing.

Hum Mov Sci

University of Saskatchewan, College of Kinesiology, 87 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5B2, Canada. Electronic address:

Published: April 2022


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

The attentional capacity required of haptic modalities while obstacle crossing may limit their effectiveness. Therefore, this study examined the attentional demands of haptic modalities during obstacle crossing. Nineteen healthy young adults walked across a 10 m laboratory floor within two modality blocks using either: 1) light touch on a railing, or 2) pulling haptic anchors. Randomly dispersed within these blocks were trials without added haptic input and verbal reaction time (VRT) tasks. VRT was compared across the three walking conditions. Gait characteristics, obstacle crossing stability, and obstacle toe clearance were compared across the three walking conditions (normal walking, light touch walking, anchored walking) and 2 VRT conditions (absence vs. presence). VRTs did not differ according to walking conditions (p > .05). Step length variability for the normal walking condition was significantly greater than for both the light touch and anchored walking conditions (p = .026). Toe clearance for the trail leg was less during light touch than normal walking (p = .020). The presence of the VRT resulted in greater toe clearance for both lead (p = .018) and trail limbs (F(2,34) = 8.053, p = .011). Neither haptic modality required significantly increased attentional demand; however, light touch walking results in less obstacle toe clearance. Haptic modalities likely provide greater benefit than risk to users during obstacle crossing.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2022.102935DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

obstacle crossing
20
light touch
20
haptic modalities
16
walking conditions
16
toe clearance
16
normal walking
12
walking
10
gait characteristics
8
characteristics obstacle
8
modalities obstacle
8

Similar Publications