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

Abstract

BackgroundCurrent 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.MethodsUpper 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.ResultsAcross 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).ConclusionsThe 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 materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1743-0003-11-132) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Reality of Myoelectric Prostheses: Understanding What Makes These Devices Difficult for Some Users to Control

“…When faced with structured multistage manual upper limb tasks, novice prosthesis users have been shown to demonstrate similar trends (Major et al, 2014). During the first few task attempts, variability in the linear acceleration patterns of the forearm is high; however, after practice with the prosthesis, variability has been shown to decrease (Sobuh, 2012).…”

Targeted box and blocks test: Normative data and comparison to standard tests

“…As noted by Hebert et al[5, 6], allowing the subject to choose which blocks to move results in tremendous variability in the trajectories employed, making comparisons among subjects difficult. Previous work [11] has also found that the joint angle ranges and peak angle values observed during the BBT are much lower than those that have been reported from able-bodied subjects performing typical ADLs such as perineal care, drinking from a cup, lifting objects from the ground and off shelves[12], and carton pouring [13]. While it remains difficult to develop a single task that will evaluate every aspect of functional performance, modifications to existing outcome measures may increase their ecological validity, while still maintaining the benefits of ease and speed of implementation; reliable, objective measurement; and repetition of motion.…”

Is it Finger or Wrist Dexterity That is Missing in Current Hand Prostheses?

“…Although able to restore certain motor functions, these prostheses limit the individual in performing a wide range of tasks useful in the daily living, due to their simple kinematics. Individuals are proficient at compensating for the missing DoFs by changing the motions of their arms and body [2] [3], however, as these compensatory movements often put greater forces on the anatomy, they may result in residual limb pain, secondary musculoskeletal complaints and overuse syndromes [4]- [8]. Hence, more capable and easily controllable prostheses must be designed by engineers for an individual with limb loss, in order to avoid these potential injuries [9].…”