Kinematic differences of prehensile task executed with different speed and hand dominance in healthy participants
Movement speed is rarely emphasized in upper-extremities rehabilitation. However, faster movement might increase the intensity of practice and produce better movement quality. Few research has also investigated the differences in movement characteristics between both arms. Such studies can contribut...
Saved in:
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Final Year Project |
Language: | English |
Published: |
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/59158 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
Language: | English |
Summary: | Movement speed is rarely emphasized in upper-extremities rehabilitation. However, faster movement might increase the intensity of practice and produce better movement quality. Few research has also investigated the differences in movement characteristics between both arms. Such studies can contribute to more accurate progress report for the paretic limbs using inter-limb kinematic comparison. Thus, the purpose of this experiment is to evaluate the kinematic differences when healthy individuals execute a prehensile task as quickly as possible and with their preferred speed for both arms. A total of 20 healthy participants were recruited to carry out a reach, grasp and transport prehensile task. The thumb-middle finger separation, finger movement efficiency, reach path trajectory, wrist velocity, trunk rotation and the duration of the reach phase were measured. Faster movements produced significantly lower aperture path ratio (improve) (p < .01) and higher peak aperture for both arms (p < .001). Inter-limb comparisons saw higher peak aperture and velocity for the non-dominant limb (p < .05). Reach path ratio and trunk rotation did not reveal any significant findings between the different hand dominance and speed conditions (p > .0125). In conclusion, faster movement produces better movement quality for both limbs. Simple and cost free instruction to move faster might be an effective way of optimizing therapeutic sessions. The dominant and non-dominant arms showed differences in movement characteristics too. Therefore, extra consideration has to be taken when evaluating the rehabilitation progress of the paretic limb via inter-limb comparison. |
---|