Determinants of Manual Dexterity in Young Adults

Abstract

The time to complete a test of manual dexterity (Grooved Pegboard Test) increases with advancing age due to changes in force steadiness, muscle strength, and cognitive function. However, the relative significance of these predictors among healthy young adults remains unknown. PURPOSE:To identify predictor variables that can explain the variance in the time that it takes young adults to complete the Grooved Pegboard Test. It was hypothesized that an expanded set of force steadiness tests, as well an assessment of cognitive function, would predict a significant amount of the variance in pegboard times. METHODS: Twenty-seven young adults (23.8 ± 4.0 years) performed three trials of the Grooved Pegboard Test with the right (dominant) hand. Strength was measured during handgrip, wrist extension, pinch, and index finger abduction tasks. Force steadiness measurements were made at 5% and 10% of maximum during traditional one-joint tests (wrist extension, index finger abduction, and pinch) as well as during novel two-joint tests (wrist extension combined with either index finger abduction or pinch). Cognitive function was assessed using a test of reaction time. RESULTS: 1) Time to complete the Grooved Pegboard Test was 52.5 ± 4.8 s (mean ± SD). 2) Force steadiness was worse for two-joint tests (3.78 ± 1.23%) than one-joint tests (2.50 ± 0.71%, P < 0.001). 3) Force steadiness was negatively correlated with pegboard times in 13 of 14 tests (e.g., wrist extension at 10%, r = -0.452, P < 0.01). 4) Pegboard times were not significantly correlation with reaction time or any measure of strength. 5) Multiple regression analysis explained 37% of the variance in the time to complete the Grooved Pegboard Test using a model containing a single one-joint test and two of the two-joint force steadiness tests of force steadiness. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an expanded set of steadiness tests significantly improved the ability to predict pegboard times among young adults. Nonetheless, a substantial amount of the variance in the pegboard times for young adults remains unexplained. None of my efforts would be possible without the support and sponsorship of the Air Force Institute of Technology. Particular thanks goes to the U.S. Air Force Academy Faculty Pipeline Program and the Department of Biology for enabling this opportunity.I would also like to thank my advisor, Professor Roger Enoka, for giving me the opportunity to join his Neurophysiology of Movement Laboratory and most importantly for his guidance, mentorship, and trust during my time at the University of Colorado. Additionally, I would like to thank the other committee members, Professors David Sherwood and Alaa Ahmed, for donating their time and energy into the review of this thesis.I also owe my fellow laboratory members thanks; particularly Awad Almuklass for his tireless work in every aspect of this project. Awad was a great teammate and his input and ideas were essential to the successful completion of this manuscript. I similarly owe thanks to the rest of my lab mates for thei...

Demographically-adjusted norms for the Grooved Pegboard and Finger Tapping tests in Spanish-speaking adults: Results from the Neuropsychological Norms for the U.S.-Mexico Border Region in Spanish (NP-NUMBRS) Project

“…This could have significant clinical importance, since manual speed and dexterity are important for the performance of daily tasks and those involved in many occupations (Wang, et al, 2015); such skills may be especially needed in the kinds of manual jobs that tend to be most readily available in the U.S. for individuals with lower education levels and a lack of English proficiency (Childfund, 2013;Coley & Baker, 2013;Pandya, 2012). Loss of dexterity has been correlated with worse job proficiency, disease progression, and cognitive impairment (Bezdicek et al, 2014;Lundergan, Soderstrom, & Chambers, 2007;Price, 2014;Yancosek & Howell, 2009). In addition, the lack of appropriate motor evaluation and diagnosis may further increase the disparity in health outcomes that already exists between English-and Spanish-speakers (AHRQ, 2015;Cigna, 2016;Marquine et al, 2016;Martinez, 2008).…”