2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Portable Sensors Add Reliable Kinematic Measures to the Assessment of Upper Extremity Function

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Ordinal scales with low resolution are used to assess arm function in clinic. These scales may be improved by adding objective kinematic measures. The aim was to analyze within-subject, inter-rater and overall reliability (i.e., including within-subject and inter-rater reliability) and check the system’s validity of kinematic measures from inertial sensors for two such protocols on one person. Twenty healthy volunteers repeatedly performed two tasks, finger-to-nose and drinking, during two test sessions with two different raters. Five inertial sensors, on the forearms, upper arms and xiphoid process were used. Comparisons against an optical camera system evaluated the measurement validity. Cycle time, range of motion (ROM) in shoulder and elbow were calculated. Bland–Altman plots and linear mixed models including the generalizability (G) coefficient evaluated the reliability of the measures. Within-subject reliability was good to excellent in both tests (G = 0.80–0.97) and may serve as a baseline when assessing upper extremities in future patient groups. Overall reliability was acceptable to excellent (G = 0.77–0.94) for all parameters except elbow axial rotation in finger-to-nose task and both elbow axial rotation and flexion/extension in drinking task, mainly due to poor inter-rater reliability in these parameters. The low to good reliability for elbow ROM probably relates to high within-subject variability. The sensors provided good to excellent measures of cycle time and shoulder ROM in non-disabled individuals and thus have the potential to improve today’s assessment of arm function.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Determining the movements of the skeleton using well-configured markers.

          The problem of determining skeletal movements in three dimensions by using a number of landmarks is treated. We present a method that determines the motion of a rigid body by using the positions of the landmarks in least-squares sense. The method uses the singular value decomposition of a matrix derived from the positions of the landmarks. We show how one can use this method to express movement of skeleton segments relative to each other. As many others have pointed out, the movement can be very ill determined if the landmarks are badly configured. We present a condition number for the problem with good geometrical properties. The condition number depends on the configuration of the landmarks and indicates how to distribute the landmarks in a suitable way.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Assessment of arm activity using triaxial accelerometry in patients with a stroke.

            To study the validity of accelerometry in the assessment of arm activity of patients with impaired arm function after stroke. Cross-sectional concurrent validity study. Rehabilitation center. Patients (N=45) at different stages after stroke. Not applicable. All patients wore 2 triaxial accelerometers around their wrists during 3 consecutive days. Arm activity was assessed, based on unilateral (activity of the affected arm) and bilateral accelerometry (ratio between the activity of the affected and nonaffected arm). The Motor Activity Log-26 (MAL-26) Amount of Use (AOU) scale was used as the main external criterion to test the concurrent validity of arm accelerometry. In addition, the MAL-26 Quality of Movement (QOM) scale and the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) subscale Hand Function were used. To test the divergent validity, the SIS subscale Mobility was used. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated. In an additional regression analysis, the hypothesized confounding influence of spasm, therapy intensity, and interobserver differences was studied. Both unilateral (ρ=.58, P<.001) and bilateral (ρ=.60, P<.001) accelerometry were significantly related to the MAL-AOU scale. Associations of both unilateral and bilateral accelerometry with the MAL-QOM and SIS subscale Hand Function corroborated these findings. The SIS subscale Mobility was not significantly associated with unilateral accelerometry (ρ=.41, P=.01) or bilateral accelerometry (ρ=.23, P=.11). None of the hypothesized confounders influenced these associations significantly. Based on the results, both the concurrent and divergent validity of unilateral and bilateral arm accelerometry for measuring arm activity after stroke are good. Copyright © 2011 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A critical discussion of intraclass correlation coefficients

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sensors (Basel)
                Sensors (Basel)
                sensors
                Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
                MDPI
                1424-8220
                12 March 2019
                March 2019
                : 19
                : 5
                : 1241
                Affiliations
                Department of Radiation Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, Umeå University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden; Fredrik.Ohberg@ 123456umu.se (F.Ö.); Nina.Sundstrom@ 123456vll.se (N.S.); Helena.Grip@ 123456vll.se (H.G.)
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: Tomas.backlund@ 123456vll.se ; Tel.: +46-90-7854025
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7431-8335
                Article
                sensors-19-01241
                10.3390/s19051241
                6427602
                30870999
                ce2d6b84-17f3-467f-b92d-973e51dde30d
                © 2019 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 17 January 2019
                : 06 March 2019
                Categories
                Article

                Biomedical engineering
                inter-rater reliability,inertial sensor,kinematics,upper limb,arm function
                Biomedical engineering
                inter-rater reliability, inertial sensor, kinematics, upper limb, arm function

                Comments

                Comment on this article