Physiotherapists could detect changes of 12 degrees or more in single-plane movement when observing forward bending, squat or hand-over-head: A cross-sectional experiment.

BACKGROUND: The visual accuracy of physiotherapists to detect changes in dynamic joint angles is currently unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate (i) the smallest detectable change in movement that physiotherapists could visually observe, and (ii) whether visual accuracy was associated with the functional activity observed or characteristics of the physiotherapist. METHODS: Thirty-four physiotherapists viewed and rated videos of squat, hand-over-head, forward bend functional activities and an artificial test condition (a reference movement followed by subsequent movements showing random differences in peak angle from 0° to 15°, so 18 sets of paired videos per functional activity). They rated each range of movement (same/more/less) relative to the reference movement, while their visual tracking was continuously monitored. Accuracy was calculated (multilevel regression) using two thresholds - two correct out of three viewings (2/3) and three correct out of three viewings (3/3). RESULTS: More than 80% of physiotherapists were able to detect 9° difference using the 2/3 threshold and 12° using the 3/3 threshold. There was no association (p > 0.05) between visual accuracy and experience, sex, or movement type, except when viewing shoulder abduction compared with knee flexion using the 3/3 threshold. The only association between accuracy and visual tracking characteristics was for assessing lumbar flexion, where use of more visual fixation areas and a shorter fixation time per area were more accurate. CONCLUSION: Physiotherapists were consistently accurate at detecting changes of ≥12° in single-plane, low-speed functional activities. Visual accuracy was not explained by experience or sex, and rarely associated with functional activity type or visual fixation.

Visual search differs but not reaction time when intercepting a 3D versus 2D videoed opponent.

The authors aimed to identify differences in (a) visual search and (b) reaction time when athletes sidestepped to intercept 2D versus 3D videoed opponents. They hypothesized that participants would (a) fixate on different parts of the opponent's body and (b) react quicker when responding to the 3D versus 2D opponent due to the added depth cues. A customized integrated stereoscopic system projected the video stimuli and synchronously recorded the gaze and motor behaviors of 10 men when they responded to two- (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) opponents. The number and duration of gaze fixations were coded according to locations on the opponent's body (head, shoulders, arms, trunk, pelvis, legs) or otherwise (other). Mediolateral pelvic movement was used to infer reaction time. Participants spent 16% less time fixating on the trunk and 23% more time outside the 3D opponent's body compared with the 2D stimulus. No reaction time differences were found. Although participants fixated less on the 3D opponent's body and, by inference, invested less perceptual processing toward interpreting the opponent's movements compared with the 2D condition, they performed the interception task equally fast in both conditions. Three-dimensional depth cues may provide more meaningful information per fixation for successful task performance.