Assessing Goal-Directed Three-Dimensional Movements in a Virtual Reality Block Design Task

Jeon, Wooram; Clamann, Michael; Kaber, David B.; Currie, Nancy J.

doi:10.1109/smc.2013.637

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kinematic measurement is a reliable predictor of psychomotor task (e.g., 3-dimensional goal-directed movements) in VR simulation as reported in [21]. Neta et al investigated the training effect on stroke patients using a target-to-target task performance framework [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feedback Type May Change the EMG Pattern and Kinematics During Robot Supported Upper Limb Reaching Task

Kato,

Tsuji,

Cikajlo

2024

IEEE Open J. Eng. Med. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Haptic interfaces and virtual reality (VR) technology have been increasingly introduced in rehabilitation, facilitating the provision of various feedback and task conditions. However, correspondence between the feedback/task conditions and movement strategy during reaching tasks remains a question. To investigate movement strategy, we assessed velocity parameters and peak latency of electromyography. Ten neuromuscularly intact volunteers participated in the measurement using haptic interface and VR. Concurrent visual feedback and various terminal feedback (e.g., visual, haptic, visual and haptic) were given. Additionally, the object size for the reaching task was changed. The results demonstrated terminal haptic feedback had a significant impact on kinematic parameters; showed \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $0.7\,\pm {\,1.4}$\end{document} s ( \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $p\,< .05$\end{document} ) shorter movement time and \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $0.01\,\pm {\,0.08}$\end{document} m/s ( \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $p\,< .05$\end{document} ) higher mean velocity compared to no terminal feedback. Also, smaller peak latency was observed in different muscle regions based on the object size.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%