Cargando…

Testing Precision and Accuracy of an Upper Extremity Proprioceptive Targeting Task Assessment

OBJECTIVE: To develop and test an assessment measuring extended physiological proprioception (EPP). EPP is a learned skill that allows one to extend proprioception to an external tool, which is important for controlling prosthetic devices. The current study examines the ability of this assessment to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dunn, Julia A., Taylor, Carolyn E., Wong, Bob, Henninger, Heath B., Bachus, Kent N., Foreman, Kenneth B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9482043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36123975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arrct.2022.100202
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To develop and test an assessment measuring extended physiological proprioception (EPP). EPP is a learned skill that allows one to extend proprioception to an external tool, which is important for controlling prosthetic devices. The current study examines the ability of this assessment to measure EPP in a nonamputee population for translation into the affected population. DESIGN: Measuring precision and accuracy of an upper extremity (UE) proprioceptive targeting task assessment. Participants completed 2 sessions of a targeting task while seated at a table. The targeting was completed with the dominant and nondominant hand and with eyes open and eyes closed during the task. Participants completed 2 sessions of the clinical test with a 1-week washout period to simulate reasonable time between clinical visits. SETTING: Research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty right-handed participants (N=20) with no neurologic or orthopedic deficits that would interfere with proprioception, median age of 25 years (range, 19-33 years), completed the assessment (10 men, 10 women). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Precision (consistency in targeting) and accuracy (distance between the intended target and participant result) in UE targeting task using EPP; test-retest repeatability between sessions. RESULTS: Both precision and accuracy were significantly decreased in the eyes-closed condition compared with the eyes-open condition regardless of targeting with dominant or nondominant hand (all P<.001). In the eyes-open condition, there was a dominance effect relating to the accuracy; however, in the eyes-closed condition, accuracy between dominant and nondominant hands was statistically equivalent. Based on minimum detectable change with 95% confidence, there was no change in either metric between the first and second sessions. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support the feasibility of using this assessment to measure EPP—based on the definition of EPP as a learned skill that indicates control over an external, simple tool—because they demonstrate reliance on proprioception in the eyes-closed condition, symmetry in proprioceptive accuracy between hands for within-participant control, and test-retest reliability for longitudinal measurements. The results also establish normative values for this assessment in young, healthy adults. Further research is required in a clinical population to evaluate the UE proprioceptive targeting task assessment further and collect objective data on EPP.