Cargando…

Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments

BACKGROUND: 2D and 3D virtual reality platforms are used for designing individualized training environments for post-stroke rehabilitation. Virtual environments (VEs) are viewed using media like head mounted displays (HMDs) and large screen projection systems (SPS) which can influence the quality of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Subramanian, Sandeep K, Levin, Mindy F
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3145562/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21718542
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-8-36
_version_ 1782209095337508864
author Subramanian, Sandeep K
Levin, Mindy F
author_facet Subramanian, Sandeep K
Levin, Mindy F
author_sort Subramanian, Sandeep K
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: 2D and 3D virtual reality platforms are used for designing individualized training environments for post-stroke rehabilitation. Virtual environments (VEs) are viewed using media like head mounted displays (HMDs) and large screen projection systems (SPS) which can influence the quality of perception of the environment. We estimated if there were differences in arm pointing kinematics when subjects with and without stroke viewed a 3D VE through two different media: HMD and SPS. METHODS: Two groups of subjects participated (healthy control, n = 10, aged 53.6 ± 17.2 yrs; stroke, n = 20, 66.2 ± 11.3 yrs). Arm motor impairment and spasticity were assessed in the stroke group which was divided into mild (n = 10) and moderate-to-severe (n = 10) sub-groups based on Fugl-Meyer Scores. Subjects pointed (8 times each) to 6 randomly presented targets located at two heights in the ipsilateral, middle and contralateral arm workspaces. Movements were repeated in the same VE viewed using HMD (Kaiser XL50) and SPS. Movement kinematics were recorded using an Optotrak system (Certus, 6 markers, 100 Hz). Upper limb motor performance (precision, velocity, trajectory straightness) and movement pattern (elbow, shoulder ranges and trunk displacement) outcomes were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVAs. RESULTS: For all groups, there were no differences in endpoint trajectory straightness, shoulder flexion and shoulder horizontal adduction ranges and sagittal trunk displacement between the two media. All subjects, however, made larger errors in the vertical direction using HMD compared to SPS. Healthy subjects also made larger errors in the sagittal direction, slower movements overall and used less range of elbow extension for the lower central target using HMD compared to SPS. The mild and moderate-to-severe sub-groups made larger RMS errors with HMD. The only advantage of using the HMD was that movements were 22% faster in the moderate-to-severe stroke sub-group compared to the SPS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the similarity in majority of the movement kinematics, differences in movement speed and larger errors were observed for movements using the HMD. Use of the SPS may be a more comfortable and effective option to view VEs for upper limb rehabilitation post-stroke. This has implications for the use of VR applications to enhance upper limb recovery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3145562
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31455622011-07-29 Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments Subramanian, Sandeep K Levin, Mindy F J Neuroeng Rehabil Research BACKGROUND: 2D and 3D virtual reality platforms are used for designing individualized training environments for post-stroke rehabilitation. Virtual environments (VEs) are viewed using media like head mounted displays (HMDs) and large screen projection systems (SPS) which can influence the quality of perception of the environment. We estimated if there were differences in arm pointing kinematics when subjects with and without stroke viewed a 3D VE through two different media: HMD and SPS. METHODS: Two groups of subjects participated (healthy control, n = 10, aged 53.6 ± 17.2 yrs; stroke, n = 20, 66.2 ± 11.3 yrs). Arm motor impairment and spasticity were assessed in the stroke group which was divided into mild (n = 10) and moderate-to-severe (n = 10) sub-groups based on Fugl-Meyer Scores. Subjects pointed (8 times each) to 6 randomly presented targets located at two heights in the ipsilateral, middle and contralateral arm workspaces. Movements were repeated in the same VE viewed using HMD (Kaiser XL50) and SPS. Movement kinematics were recorded using an Optotrak system (Certus, 6 markers, 100 Hz). Upper limb motor performance (precision, velocity, trajectory straightness) and movement pattern (elbow, shoulder ranges and trunk displacement) outcomes were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVAs. RESULTS: For all groups, there were no differences in endpoint trajectory straightness, shoulder flexion and shoulder horizontal adduction ranges and sagittal trunk displacement between the two media. All subjects, however, made larger errors in the vertical direction using HMD compared to SPS. Healthy subjects also made larger errors in the sagittal direction, slower movements overall and used less range of elbow extension for the lower central target using HMD compared to SPS. The mild and moderate-to-severe sub-groups made larger RMS errors with HMD. The only advantage of using the HMD was that movements were 22% faster in the moderate-to-severe stroke sub-group compared to the SPS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the similarity in majority of the movement kinematics, differences in movement speed and larger errors were observed for movements using the HMD. Use of the SPS may be a more comfortable and effective option to view VEs for upper limb rehabilitation post-stroke. This has implications for the use of VR applications to enhance upper limb recovery. BioMed Central 2011-06-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3145562/ /pubmed/21718542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-8-36 Text en Copyright ©2011 Subramanian and Levin; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Subramanian, Sandeep K
Levin, Mindy F
Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments
title Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments
title_full Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments
title_fullStr Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments
title_full_unstemmed Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments
title_short Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments
title_sort viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3d virtual environments
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3145562/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21718542
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-8-36
work_keys_str_mv AT subramaniansandeepk viewingmediumaffectsarmmotorperformancein3dvirtualenvironments
AT levinmindyf viewingmediumaffectsarmmotorperformancein3dvirtualenvironments