independent mobility - imc16imc16.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/w.-satwikasanity.pdf ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Satwikasanti, W.T1 ; Fray, M1; Clemes, S. 2 ; Jeganathan, V1; Beeby, M.3
1 Design School, Loughborough University, UK2 School of Sport, Exercise and Health Science, Loughborough University, UK3 Mayfields Life-Skills Centre, UK
ENHANCING INDIVIDUAL WELLBEING IN PHYSICAL ACTIVITY
A Running-Line Assistive Device for Independent Running
Without Vision Project (Pilot Study)
DEPENDENCESOCIAL BARRIER
PHYSICALLY ACTIVEBEING INDEPENDENT
SOCIALLY ACTIVE
TRANSITION STAGE
INDEPENDENT MOBILITY
BACKGROUND
GOOD EXPERIENCE CONTINUE IT
CHECK HANDPOSITION TO THE BODY
CHECK BODYPOSITION TO THE ENVIRONMENT
LOOK FOR OBJECT(EGOCENTRIC)
BODY BALANCE
TACTILEAUDITORYMEMORY
PERCEPTION
FEEDBACK
MOTORIC LEARNING
Visual sensory
LOOK FOR OBJECT(ALLOCENTRIC)
BODY BALANCE
FEEDBACKFEEDBACK
BODY POSITIONTO THINGS
ACTION OF MOVEMENT
NORMAL VISION VISION - LOSS
BACKGROUND
Copyright : Victor Jeganathan
RUNNING – LINE AS AN INDEPENDENT RUNNING ASSISTIVE DEVICE
Will they run better ?
RESEARCH QUESTION
METHOD
BLINDFOLDED
spatio-temporal running gait performance
1 2 3
Centre of Mass (COM) lateral displacement
Velocity and Step length
Emotional responses
5 pairs of runs with both hands
BLIND
The running site and measurement area
METHOD
FINAL RUNNING-LINE FEATURES IN THREE SESSIONS
METHOD
WT
B
A = HUMAN VOICE
ANALYSIS
PARTICIPANTS
BLINDFOLDED(n=8, 29.38 ± 5.24 yr)
CONGENITALLY BLIND
(n=3, 17.38 ± 5.77 yr)
Primary cues used by participants to
complete the task based on rating scaleRESULT AND DISCUSSION
BLINDFOLDED CONGENITALLY BLIND
1st session T
WT B
T B
A
A
AW
BW
BWA
2nd session
3rd session
LEVEL OF CONFIDENT OF
BEING STRAIGHT
LEVEL OF ENJOYMENT
BLINFOLDED BLIND
Session 1
Session 2Session 3
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
BLINFOLDED BLIND
Session 1
Session 2Session 3
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
0 1 2 3 4 5
SESSION 3
SESSION 2
SESSION 1
VELOCITY
CONGENTITALLY BLIND BLINFOLDED
COM Lateral displacement (Z’) of congenitally blind
COM Lateral displacement (Z’) of blindfolded
RESULT AND DISCUSSIONZ’
(C
M)
BFSes1BFSes2BFSes3
BASE LINE CBSes1CBSes2CBSes3
BASE LINE
BLINDFOLDED
(right-handed)(left-handed)
CONGENITALLY BLIND
(right-handed)(left-handed)
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Session 1
Session 2
Session 3
The running posture
(median sagittal plane)
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
BLINDFOLDED CONGENITALLY BLIND
The running posture
(frontal plane)
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
INVERTED- PENDULUM
running surface
‘en bloc’ movement
RESULT AND DISCUSSIONStronger coupling
between head motion, hip, and
the platform periodic
oscilation
The relation of
task, product and
user characteristic
in non-vision
running
SUMMARY
TO EVALUATE THE PHYSICAL ACTIVITY LEVEL OF CHILDREN WITH VI BY GIVING ACCESS FOR RUNNING LINE REGULARLY
BIOMECHANICAL STUDY OF POSTURE PERFORMANCE AFTER THE RUNNING INTERVENTION
FUTURE WORK
Copyright : Victor Jeganathan
TO EVALUATE SELF-ESTEEM IMPROVEMENT OF CHILDREN WITH VI POST RUNNING-LINE INTERVENSION
FULL VIDEO