Comparison of upper limb kinematics in two activities of daily living with different handling requirements

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2020

Authors

Mesquita, IA (Author) Other; Pereira da Fonseca, PFP (Author) Other; Borgonovo Santos, M (Author) Other; Ribeiro, E (Author) Other; Vieira Pinheiro, ARV (Author) Other; Correia, M. V. (Author) FEUP; Silva, C (Author) Other

Journal

Title: Human Movement Science

Vol. 72

ISSN: 0167-9457

Publisher: Elsevier

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 1 Citation

Scopus - 1 Citation

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-00S-4RC

DOI: 10.1016/j.humov.2020.102632

Abstract (EN): Introduction: Recently, kinematic analysis of the drinking task (DRINK) has been recommended to assess the quality of upper limb (UL) movement after stroke, but the accomplishment of this task may become difficult for poststroke patients with hand impairment. Therefore, it is necessary to study ADLs that involve a simpler interaction with a daily life target, such as the turning on a light task (LIGHT). As the knowledge of movement performed by healthy adults becomes essential to assess the quality of movement of poststroke patients, the main goal of this article was to compare the kinematic strategies used by healthy adults in LIGHT with those that are used in DRINK. Methods: 63 adults, aged 30 to 69 years old, drank water and turned on a light, using both ULs separately, while seated. The movements of both tasks were captured by a 3D motion capture system. End-point and joint kinematics of reaching and returning phases were analysed. A multifactorial analysis of variance with repeated measures was applied to the kinematic metrics, using age, sex, body mass index and dominance as main factors. Results: Mean and peak velocities, index of curvature, shoulder flexion and elbow extension were lower in LIGHT, which suggests that the real hand trajectory was smaller in this task. In LIGHT, reaching was less smooth and returning was smoother than DRINK. The instant of peak velocity was similar in both tasks. There was a minimal anterior trunk displacement in LIGHT, and a greater anterior trunk displacement in DRINK. Age and sex were the main factors which exerted effect on some of the kinematics, especially in LIGHT. Conclusion: The different target formats and hand contact in DRINK and LIGHT seem to be responsible for differences in velocity profile, efficiency, smoothness, joint angles and trunk displacement. Results suggest that the real hand trajectory was smaller in LIGHT and that interaction with the switch seems to be less demanding than with the glass. Accordingly, LIGHT could be a good option for the assessment of poststroke patients without grasping ability. Age and sex seem to be the main factors to be considered in future studies for a better match between healthy and poststroke adults.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 15