There are concerns about the safety of texting while walking. Although evidence of negative effects of mobile phone use on gait is scarce, cognitive distraction, altered mechanical demands, and the reduced visual field associated with texting are likely to have an impact. In 26 healthy individuals we examined the effect of mobile phone use on gait. Individuals walked at a comfortable pace in a straight line over a distance of ∼8.5 m while; 1) walking without the use of a phone, 2) reading text on a mobile phone, or 3) typing text on a mobile phone. Gait performance was evaluated using a three-dimensional movement analysis system. In comparison with normal waking, when participants read or wrote text messages they walked with: greater absolute lateral foot position from one stride to the next; slower speed; greater rotation range of motion (ROM) of the head with respect to global space; the head held in a flexed position; more in-phase motion of the thorax and head in all planes, less motion between thorax and head (neck ROM); and more tightly organized coordination in lateral flexion and rotation directions. While writing text, participants walked slower, deviated more from a straight line and used less neck ROM than reading text. Although the arms and head moved with the thorax to reduce relative motion of the phone and facilitate reading and texting, movement of the head in global space increased and this could negatively impact the balance system. Texting, and to a lesser extent reading, modify gait performance. Texting or reading on a mobile phone may pose an additional risk to safety for pedestrians navigating obstacles or crossing the road.

Psychological features have been related to trunk muscle activation patterns in low back pain (LBP). We hypothesised higher pain-related fear would relate to changes in trunk mechanical properties, such as higher trunk stiffness. To evaluate the relationship between trunk mechanical properties and psychological features in people with recurrent LBP. The relationship between pain-related fear (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, TSK; Photograph Series of Daily Activities, PHODA-SeV; Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, FABQ; Pain Catastrophizing Scale, PCS) and trunk mechanical properties (estimated from the response of the trunk to a sudden sagittal plane forwards or backwards perturbation by unpredictable release of a load) was explored in a case-controlled study of 14 LBP participants. Regression analysis (r²) tested the linear relationships between pain-related fear and trunk mechanical properties (trunk stiffness and damping). Mechanical properties were also compared with t-tests between groups based on stratification according to high/low scores based on median values for each psychological measure. Fear of movement (TSK) was positively associated with trunk stiffness (but not damping) in response to a forward perturbation (r² = 0.33, P = 0.03), but not backward perturbation (r² = 0.22, P = 0.09). Other pain-related fear constructs (PHODA-SeV, FABQ, PCS) were not associated with trunk stiffness or damping. Trunk stiffness was greater for individuals with high kinesiophobia (TSK) for forward (P = 0.03) perturbations, and greater with forward perturbation for those with high fear avoidance scores (FABQ-W, P = 0.01). Fear of movement is positively (but weakly) associated with trunk stiffness. This provides preliminary support an interaction between biological and psychological features of LBP, suggesting this condition may be best understood if these domains are not considered in isolation.

This study aimed to examine how acute muscle pain affects muscle coordination during gait with consideration of muscle synergies (i.e., group of muscles activated in synchrony), amplitude of muscle activity and kinematics. A secondary aim was to determine whether any adaptation was specific to pain location. Sixteen participants walked on a treadmill during 5 conditions [control, low back pain (LBP), washout LBP, calf pain (CalfP), and washout CalfP]. Five muscle synergies were identified for all of the conditions. Cross-validation analysis showed that muscle synergy vectors extracted for the control condition accounted for >81% of variance accounted for from the other conditions. Muscle synergies were altered very little in some participants (n = 7 for LBP; n = 10 for CalfP), but were more affected in the others (n = 9 for LBP; n = 6 for CalfP). No systematic differences between pain locations were observed. Considering all participants, synergies related to propulsion and weight acceptance were largely unaffected by pain, whereas synergies related to other functions (trunk control and leg deceleration) were more affected. Gastrocnemii activity was less during both CalfP and LBP than control. Soleus activity was further reduced during CalfP, and this was associated with reduced plantar flexion. Some lower leg muscles exhibited adaptations depending on pain location (e.g., greater vastus lateralis and rectus femoris activity during CalfP than LBP). Overall, these changes in muscle coordination involve a participant-specific strategy that is important to further explore, as it may explain why some people are more likely to develop persistence of a painful condition.