Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to determine reliability of computerized dynamic visual acuity (DVA) testing and to determine reference values for younger and older adults. Background: A primary function of the vestibular system is to maintain gaze stability during head motion. The DVA test quantifies gaze stabilization with the head moving versus stationary. Commercially available computerized systems allow clinicians to incorporate DVA into their assessment; however, information regarding reliability and normative values of these systems is sparse. Methods: Forty-six healthy adults, grouped by age, with normal vestibular function were recruited. Each participant completed computerized DVA testing including static visual acuity, minimum perception time, and DVA using the NeuroCom inVision System. Testing was performed by two examiners in the same session and then repeated at a follow-up session 3 to 14 days later. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to determine inter-rater and test-retest reliability. Results: ICCs for inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.323 to 0.937 and from 0.434 to 0.909 for horizontal and vertical head movements, respectively. ICCs for test-retest reliability ranged from 0.154 to 0.856 and from 0.377 to 0.9062 for horizontal and vertical head movements, respectively. Overall, raw scores (left/right DVA and up/down DVA) were more reliable than DVA loss scores. Conclusion: Reliability of a commercially available DVA system has poor-to-fair reliability for DVA loss scores. The use of a convergence paradigm and not incorporating the forced choice paradigm may contribute to poor reliability. Copyright (C) 2016 by Otology & Neurotology, Inc. Image copyright (C) 2010 Wolters Kluwer Health/Anatomical Chart Company
from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/1UjKYTY
via IFTTT
Τρίτη 22 Μαρτίου 2016
Does “transition shoe” promote an intermediate biomechanical condition compared to running in conventional shoe and in reduced protection condition?
Publication date: Available online 21 March 2016
Source:Gait & Posture
Author(s): Ana Paula da Silva Azevedo, Bruno Mezêncio, Raísa Valvassori, Luis Mochizuki, Alberto Carlos Amadio, Júlio Cerca Serrão
This study evaluated if running in a “transition shoe” commercially available results in intermediate mechanical load upon lower extremities compared to conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Kinematic and kinetic parameters while running in different shoe conditions were compared. Fourteen runners (12 men, 2 women; age=28.4±7.3 years), inexperienced in minimalist shoes and barefoot running, ran on an instrumented treadmill within four experimental conditions (conventional shoe - CS, transition shoe - TrS, minimalist shoe–MS, and barefoot - BF). Running was performed at 9km/h for 10minutes in each experimental condition. Vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) and two-dimensional kinematic variables of lower limbs (both legs) were recorded. Nine data acquisitions (10 s) were conducted for each footwear condition. Transition shoe lead to significant changes in VGRF variables related to impact control, while kinematic parameters were little affected. The TrS had smaller first peak of VGRF (Fy1) than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p=0.050) and BF (p≤0.001). Time to first peak of VGRF (tFy1) of TrS was smaller than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p≤0.001) and BF (p≤0.001). The TrS and MS induced to lesser knee flexion (p<0.001) and greater dorsiflexion (p<0.001) than CS and BF. Thus, results suggest the transition shoe (TrS) tested seem to promote an intermediate mechanical load condition only for VGRF parameters, presenting values of impact forces between those found for conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Such knowledge could be useful for the transition process from conventional running shoe to minimalist shoe/barefoot.
from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/25hWCCf
via IFTTT
Source:Gait & Posture
Author(s): Ana Paula da Silva Azevedo, Bruno Mezêncio, Raísa Valvassori, Luis Mochizuki, Alberto Carlos Amadio, Júlio Cerca Serrão
This study evaluated if running in a “transition shoe” commercially available results in intermediate mechanical load upon lower extremities compared to conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Kinematic and kinetic parameters while running in different shoe conditions were compared. Fourteen runners (12 men, 2 women; age=28.4±7.3 years), inexperienced in minimalist shoes and barefoot running, ran on an instrumented treadmill within four experimental conditions (conventional shoe - CS, transition shoe - TrS, minimalist shoe–MS, and barefoot - BF). Running was performed at 9km/h for 10minutes in each experimental condition. Vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) and two-dimensional kinematic variables of lower limbs (both legs) were recorded. Nine data acquisitions (10 s) were conducted for each footwear condition. Transition shoe lead to significant changes in VGRF variables related to impact control, while kinematic parameters were little affected. The TrS had smaller first peak of VGRF (Fy1) than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p=0.050) and BF (p≤0.001). Time to first peak of VGRF (tFy1) of TrS was smaller than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p≤0.001) and BF (p≤0.001). The TrS and MS induced to lesser knee flexion (p<0.001) and greater dorsiflexion (p<0.001) than CS and BF. Thus, results suggest the transition shoe (TrS) tested seem to promote an intermediate mechanical load condition only for VGRF parameters, presenting values of impact forces between those found for conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Such knowledge could be useful for the transition process from conventional running shoe to minimalist shoe/barefoot.
from #Audiology via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/25hWCCf
via IFTTT
Does “transition shoe” promote an intermediate biomechanical condition compared to running in conventional shoe and in reduced protection condition?
Publication date: Available online 21 March 2016
Source:Gait & Posture
Author(s): Ana Paula da Silva Azevedo, Bruno Mezêncio, Raísa Valvassori, Luis Mochizuki, Alberto Carlos Amadio, Júlio Cerca Serrão
This study evaluated if running in a “transition shoe” commercially available results in intermediate mechanical load upon lower extremities compared to conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Kinematic and kinetic parameters while running in different shoe conditions were compared. Fourteen runners (12 men, 2 women; age=28.4±7.3 years), inexperienced in minimalist shoes and barefoot running, ran on an instrumented treadmill within four experimental conditions (conventional shoe - CS, transition shoe - TrS, minimalist shoe–MS, and barefoot - BF). Running was performed at 9km/h for 10minutes in each experimental condition. Vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) and two-dimensional kinematic variables of lower limbs (both legs) were recorded. Nine data acquisitions (10 s) were conducted for each footwear condition. Transition shoe lead to significant changes in VGRF variables related to impact control, while kinematic parameters were little affected. The TrS had smaller first peak of VGRF (Fy1) than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p=0.050) and BF (p≤0.001). Time to first peak of VGRF (tFy1) of TrS was smaller than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p≤0.001) and BF (p≤0.001). The TrS and MS induced to lesser knee flexion (p<0.001) and greater dorsiflexion (p<0.001) than CS and BF. Thus, results suggest the transition shoe (TrS) tested seem to promote an intermediate mechanical load condition only for VGRF parameters, presenting values of impact forces between those found for conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Such knowledge could be useful for the transition process from conventional running shoe to minimalist shoe/barefoot.
from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/25hWCCf
via IFTTT
Source:Gait & Posture
Author(s): Ana Paula da Silva Azevedo, Bruno Mezêncio, Raísa Valvassori, Luis Mochizuki, Alberto Carlos Amadio, Júlio Cerca Serrão
This study evaluated if running in a “transition shoe” commercially available results in intermediate mechanical load upon lower extremities compared to conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Kinematic and kinetic parameters while running in different shoe conditions were compared. Fourteen runners (12 men, 2 women; age=28.4±7.3 years), inexperienced in minimalist shoes and barefoot running, ran on an instrumented treadmill within four experimental conditions (conventional shoe - CS, transition shoe - TrS, minimalist shoe–MS, and barefoot - BF). Running was performed at 9km/h for 10minutes in each experimental condition. Vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) and two-dimensional kinematic variables of lower limbs (both legs) were recorded. Nine data acquisitions (10 s) were conducted for each footwear condition. Transition shoe lead to significant changes in VGRF variables related to impact control, while kinematic parameters were little affected. The TrS had smaller first peak of VGRF (Fy1) than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p=0.050) and BF (p≤0.001). Time to first peak of VGRF (tFy1) of TrS was smaller than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p≤0.001) and BF (p≤0.001). The TrS and MS induced to lesser knee flexion (p<0.001) and greater dorsiflexion (p<0.001) than CS and BF. Thus, results suggest the transition shoe (TrS) tested seem to promote an intermediate mechanical load condition only for VGRF parameters, presenting values of impact forces between those found for conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Such knowledge could be useful for the transition process from conventional running shoe to minimalist shoe/barefoot.
from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/25hWCCf
via IFTTT
Does “transition shoe” promote an intermediate biomechanical condition compared to running in conventional shoe and in reduced protection condition?
Publication date: Available online 21 March 2016
Source:Gait & Posture
Author(s): Ana Paula da Silva Azevedo, Bruno Mezêncio, Raísa Valvassori, Luis Mochizuki, Alberto Carlos Amadio, Júlio Cerca Serrão
This study evaluated if running in a “transition shoe” commercially available results in intermediate mechanical load upon lower extremities compared to conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Kinematic and kinetic parameters while running in different shoe conditions were compared. Fourteen runners (12 men, 2 women; age=28.4±7.3 years), inexperienced in minimalist shoes and barefoot running, ran on an instrumented treadmill within four experimental conditions (conventional shoe - CS, transition shoe - TrS, minimalist shoe–MS, and barefoot - BF). Running was performed at 9km/h for 10minutes in each experimental condition. Vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) and two-dimensional kinematic variables of lower limbs (both legs) were recorded. Nine data acquisitions (10 s) were conducted for each footwear condition. Transition shoe lead to significant changes in VGRF variables related to impact control, while kinematic parameters were little affected. The TrS had smaller first peak of VGRF (Fy1) than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p=0.050) and BF (p≤0.001). Time to first peak of VGRF (tFy1) of TrS was smaller than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p≤0.001) and BF (p≤0.001). The TrS and MS induced to lesser knee flexion (p<0.001) and greater dorsiflexion (p<0.001) than CS and BF. Thus, results suggest the transition shoe (TrS) tested seem to promote an intermediate mechanical load condition only for VGRF parameters, presenting values of impact forces between those found for conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Such knowledge could be useful for the transition process from conventional running shoe to minimalist shoe/barefoot.
from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/25hWCCf
via IFTTT
Source:Gait & Posture
Author(s): Ana Paula da Silva Azevedo, Bruno Mezêncio, Raísa Valvassori, Luis Mochizuki, Alberto Carlos Amadio, Júlio Cerca Serrão
This study evaluated if running in a “transition shoe” commercially available results in intermediate mechanical load upon lower extremities compared to conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Kinematic and kinetic parameters while running in different shoe conditions were compared. Fourteen runners (12 men, 2 women; age=28.4±7.3 years), inexperienced in minimalist shoes and barefoot running, ran on an instrumented treadmill within four experimental conditions (conventional shoe - CS, transition shoe - TrS, minimalist shoe–MS, and barefoot - BF). Running was performed at 9km/h for 10minutes in each experimental condition. Vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) and two-dimensional kinematic variables of lower limbs (both legs) were recorded. Nine data acquisitions (10 s) were conducted for each footwear condition. Transition shoe lead to significant changes in VGRF variables related to impact control, while kinematic parameters were little affected. The TrS had smaller first peak of VGRF (Fy1) than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p=0.050) and BF (p≤0.001). Time to first peak of VGRF (tFy1) of TrS was smaller than CS (p≤0.001) and higher than MS (p≤0.001) and BF (p≤0.001). The TrS and MS induced to lesser knee flexion (p<0.001) and greater dorsiflexion (p<0.001) than CS and BF. Thus, results suggest the transition shoe (TrS) tested seem to promote an intermediate mechanical load condition only for VGRF parameters, presenting values of impact forces between those found for conventional shoe and minimalist shoe/barefoot. Such knowledge could be useful for the transition process from conventional running shoe to minimalist shoe/barefoot.
from #Audiology via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/25hWCCf
via IFTTT
Εγγραφή σε:
Αναρτήσεις (Atom)