Cargando…

Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks

BACKGROUND: Current upper limb prostheses do not replace the active degrees-of-freedom distal to the elbow inherent to intact physiology. Limited evidence suggests that transradial prosthesis users demonstrate shoulder and trunk movements to compensate for these missing volitional degrees-of-freedom...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Major, Matthew J, Stine, Rebecca L, Heckathorne, Craig W, Fatone, Stefania, Gard, Steven A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4164738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25192744
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-132
_version_ 1782334997918646272
author Major, Matthew J
Stine, Rebecca L
Heckathorne, Craig W
Fatone, Stefania
Gard, Steven A
author_facet Major, Matthew J
Stine, Rebecca L
Heckathorne, Craig W
Fatone, Stefania
Gard, Steven A
author_sort Major, Matthew J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Current upper limb prostheses do not replace the active degrees-of-freedom distal to the elbow inherent to intact physiology. Limited evidence suggests that transradial prosthesis users demonstrate shoulder and trunk movements to compensate for these missing volitional degrees-of-freedom. The purpose of this study was to enhance understanding of the effects of prosthesis use on motor performance by comparing the movement quality of upper body kinematics between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks that reflect activities of daily living. METHODS: Upper body kinematics were collected on six able-bodied controls and seven myoelectric transradial prosthesis users during execution of goal-oriented tasks. Range-of-motion, absolute kinematic variability (standard deviation), and kinematic repeatability (adjusted coefficient-of-multiple-determination) were quantified for trunk motion in three planes, shoulder flexion/extension, shoulder ab/adduction, and elbow flexion/extension across five trials per task. Linear mixed models analysis assessed between-group differences and correlation analysis evaluated association between prosthesis experience and kinematic repeatability. RESULTS: Across tasks, prosthesis users demonstrated increased trunk motion in all three planes and shoulder abduction compared to controls (p ≤ 0.004). Absolute kinematic variability was greater for prosthesis users for all degrees-of-freedom irrespective of task, but was significant only for degrees-of-freedom that demonstrated increased range-of-motion (p ≤ 0.003). For degrees-of-freedom that did not display increased absolute variability for prosthesis users, able-bodied kinematics were characterized by significantly greater repeatability (p ≤ 0.015). Prosthesis experience had a strong positive relationship with average kinematic repeatability (r = 0.790, p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The use of shoulder and trunk movements by prosthesis users as compensatory motions to execute goal-oriented tasks demonstrates the flexibility and adaptability of the motor system. Increased variability in movement suggests that prosthesis users do not converge on a defined motor strategy to the same degree as able-bodied individuals. Kinematic repeatability may increase with prosthesis experience, or encourage continued device use, and future work is warranted to explore these relationships. As compensatory dynamics may be necessary to improve functionality of transradial prostheses, users may benefit from dedicated training that encourages optimization of these dynamics to facilitate execution of daily living activity, and fosters adaptable but reliable motor strategies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1743-0003-11-132) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4164738
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41647382014-09-17 Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks Major, Matthew J Stine, Rebecca L Heckathorne, Craig W Fatone, Stefania Gard, Steven A J Neuroeng Rehabil Research BACKGROUND: Current upper limb prostheses do not replace the active degrees-of-freedom distal to the elbow inherent to intact physiology. Limited evidence suggests that transradial prosthesis users demonstrate shoulder and trunk movements to compensate for these missing volitional degrees-of-freedom. The purpose of this study was to enhance understanding of the effects of prosthesis use on motor performance by comparing the movement quality of upper body kinematics between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks that reflect activities of daily living. METHODS: Upper body kinematics were collected on six able-bodied controls and seven myoelectric transradial prosthesis users during execution of goal-oriented tasks. Range-of-motion, absolute kinematic variability (standard deviation), and kinematic repeatability (adjusted coefficient-of-multiple-determination) were quantified for trunk motion in three planes, shoulder flexion/extension, shoulder ab/adduction, and elbow flexion/extension across five trials per task. Linear mixed models analysis assessed between-group differences and correlation analysis evaluated association between prosthesis experience and kinematic repeatability. RESULTS: Across tasks, prosthesis users demonstrated increased trunk motion in all three planes and shoulder abduction compared to controls (p ≤ 0.004). Absolute kinematic variability was greater for prosthesis users for all degrees-of-freedom irrespective of task, but was significant only for degrees-of-freedom that demonstrated increased range-of-motion (p ≤ 0.003). For degrees-of-freedom that did not display increased absolute variability for prosthesis users, able-bodied kinematics were characterized by significantly greater repeatability (p ≤ 0.015). Prosthesis experience had a strong positive relationship with average kinematic repeatability (r = 0.790, p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The use of shoulder and trunk movements by prosthesis users as compensatory motions to execute goal-oriented tasks demonstrates the flexibility and adaptability of the motor system. Increased variability in movement suggests that prosthesis users do not converge on a defined motor strategy to the same degree as able-bodied individuals. Kinematic repeatability may increase with prosthesis experience, or encourage continued device use, and future work is warranted to explore these relationships. As compensatory dynamics may be necessary to improve functionality of transradial prostheses, users may benefit from dedicated training that encourages optimization of these dynamics to facilitate execution of daily living activity, and fosters adaptable but reliable motor strategies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1743-0003-11-132) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4164738/ /pubmed/25192744 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-132 Text en © Major et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Major, Matthew J
Stine, Rebecca L
Heckathorne, Craig W
Fatone, Stefania
Gard, Steven A
Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks
title Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks
title_full Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks
title_fullStr Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks
title_short Comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks
title_sort comparison of range-of-motion and variability in upper body movements between transradial prosthesis users and able-bodied controls when executing goal-oriented tasks
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4164738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25192744
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-132
work_keys_str_mv AT majormatthewj comparisonofrangeofmotionandvariabilityinupperbodymovementsbetweentransradialprosthesisusersandablebodiedcontrolswhenexecutinggoalorientedtasks
AT stinerebeccal comparisonofrangeofmotionandvariabilityinupperbodymovementsbetweentransradialprosthesisusersandablebodiedcontrolswhenexecutinggoalorientedtasks
AT heckathornecraigw comparisonofrangeofmotionandvariabilityinupperbodymovementsbetweentransradialprosthesisusersandablebodiedcontrolswhenexecutinggoalorientedtasks
AT fatonestefania comparisonofrangeofmotionandvariabilityinupperbodymovementsbetweentransradialprosthesisusersandablebodiedcontrolswhenexecutinggoalorientedtasks
AT gardstevena comparisonofrangeofmotionandvariabilityinupperbodymovementsbetweentransradialprosthesisusersandablebodiedcontrolswhenexecutinggoalorientedtasks