Divided visual attention as a predictor of bumping while walking: the Salisbury Eye Evaluation.

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to determine the association between bumping while walking and divided visual attention, as measured by the useful field of view (UFOV). METHODS The Salisbury Eye Evaluation is a population-based study of community-dwelling adults, aged 72 to 92 at the third round of data collection. Participants walked a circuitous 32.8-m course, seeded with obstacles, and the number of bumps made while traversing the course was counted. UFOV divided attention score was based on processing speed: the time taken to identify a central target, and the location of a peripheral target simultaneously. Association between number of bumps and UFOV score was assessed in a generalized linear model, with adjustment for vision and attention measures that might explain the UFOV score. RESULTS Of the 1504 participants in this study, 10.1% did not attempt the mobility course. In a model adjusting for demographic, physical, cognitive and attention, and vision measures, a decrease of 50 ms in processing speed for the divided-attention task was associated with a 4.9% increase (P = 0.004) in number of bumps made over the course. Receiver operating characteristic curves were created for the UFOV and visual field tests, to determine accuracy in detecting those with a high number of bumps. The visual field test had slightly higher area under the curve, but positive predictive value for both tests was low. CONCLUSIONS The UFOV test of divided attention, as measured by processing speed, independently predicted bumping while walking. These data suggest that poor visual attention is a significant risk factor for bumping while walking.

[1]  G S Rubin,et al.  A comprehensive assessment of visual impairment in a population of older Americans. The SEE Study. Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project. , 1997, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[2]  K. Ball,et al.  Visual attention problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes in older drivers. , 1993, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[3]  B Esterman,et al.  Functional scoring of the binocular field. , 1982, Ophthalmology.

[4]  C. Owsley,et al.  Vision and Driving in the Elderly , 1994, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[5]  D. Goldberg The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire : a technique for the identification and assessment of non-psychotic psychiatric illness , 1972 .

[6]  B Brown,et al.  Contribution of Vision Variables to Mobility in Age‐Related Maculopathy Patients , 1986, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[7]  D. Goldberg,et al.  A scaled version of the General Health Questionnaire , 1979, Psychological Medicine.

[8]  J. Brandt,et al.  Development and psychometric properties of the brief test of attention , 1996 .

[9]  D. Roth,et al.  Relation of Useful Field of View and other Screening Tests to on-Road Driving Performance , 2000, Perceptual and motor skills.

[10]  Christianna S. Williams,et al.  Falls, injuries due to falls, and the risk of admission to a nursing home. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  R. Newton,et al.  Relationship between balance and gait stability in healthy older adults. , 2004, Journal of aging and physical activity.

[12]  M. Tinetti,et al.  Development of the Common Data Base for the FICSIT Trials , 1993, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[13]  B. Munoz,et al.  Association of Visual Field Loss and Mobility Performance in Older Adults: Salisbury Eye Evaluation Study , 2004, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[14]  P V Rabins,et al.  Predictors of nursing home placement among elderly public housing residents. , 1999, The Gerontologist.

[15]  C. Johnson,et al.  Predicting binocular visual field sensitivity from monocular visual field results. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[16]  D. Melzer,et al.  The predictive validity for mortality of the index of mobility-related limitation--results from the EPESE study. , 2003, Age and ageing.

[17]  L. Caulfield,et al.  Anthropometric status and cataract: the Salisbury Eye Evaluation project. , 1999, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[18]  M. Sloane,et al.  Visual processing impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash among older adults. , 1998, JAMA.

[19]  K. Turano,et al.  Traditional Measures of Mobility Performance and Retinitis Pigmentosa , 1998, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[20]  G. B. Wetherill,et al.  SEQUENTIAL ESTIMATION OF POINTS ON A PSYCHOMETRIC FUNCTION. , 1965, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[21]  I L Bailey,et al.  Clinical grading and the effects of scaling. , 1991, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[22]  L. Ferrucci,et al.  A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. , 1994, Journal of gerontology.

[23]  S. Folstein,et al.  "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. , 1975, Journal of psychiatric research.

[24]  J. Lovie-Kitchin,et al.  What areas of of the visual field are important for mobility in low vision patients , 1990 .

[25]  D. Roenker,et al.  Age and visual search: expanding the useful field of view. , 1988, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[26]  R A Kronmal,et al.  Risk factors for 5-year mortality in older adults: the Cardiovascular Health Study. , 1998, JAMA.