OBJECTIVE: Approximately 40% of Americans with disabilities cannot operate wheeled mobility devices and computers adequately because of diminished upper-limb motor control, sensory limitations, and cognitive impairments. We developed tuning software that can customize control interfaces for individuals with upper-limb impairments. This study compared the differences in each parameter among different diagnostic groups. DESIGN: The age of the subjects ranged from 18 to 80 yrs. The participants were classified into the following groups: athetoid cerebral palsy, spastic cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, upper-limb spasticity, and control. We used a validated tuning software protocol to customize an isometric joystick before a virtual tracing or driving task. Tuning parameters were then compared across groups. RESULTS: Seventy-five subjects were included. Gain, the parameter responsible for force-to-output ratios, in each directional axis (leftward gain: P = 0.018; rightward gain: P = 0.003; reverse gain: P = 0.007; forward gain: P = 0.014) was significantly different across the diagnostic groups. Post hoc analyses showed that the control group required smaller leftward gain than spastic cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis and upper-limb spasticity groups and smaller gain in all other directions compared with spastic cerebral palsy. CONCLUSIONS: Gain may be a useful parameter in tuning by clinicians, and efforts aimed at gain customization may aid the development of commercially available tuning software packages.
OBJECTIVE: Approximately 40% of Americans with disabilities cannot operate wheeled mobility devices and computers adequately because of diminished upper-limb motor control, sensory limitations, and cognitive impairments. We developed tuning software that can customize control interfaces for individuals with upper-limb impairments. This study compared the differences in each parameter among different diagnostic groups. DESIGN: The age of the subjects ranged from 18 to 80 yrs. The participants were classified into the following groups: athetoid cerebral palsy, spastic cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, upper-limb spasticity, and control. We used a validated tuning software protocol to customize an isometric joystick before a virtual tracing or driving task. Tuning parameters were then compared across groups. RESULTS: Seventy-five subjects were included. Gain, the parameter responsible for force-to-output ratios, in each directional axis (leftward gain: P = 0.018; rightward gain: P = 0.003; reverse gain: P = 0.007; forward gain: P = 0.014) was significantly different across the diagnostic groups. Post hoc analyses showed that the control group required smaller leftward gain than spastic cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis and upper-limb spasticity groups and smaller gain in all other directions compared with spastic cerebral palsy. CONCLUSIONS: Gain may be a useful parameter in tuning by clinicians, and efforts aimed at gain customization may aid the development of commercially available tuning software packages.
Authors: Rory A Cooper; Donald M Spaeth; Daniel K Jones; Michael L Boninger; Shirley G Fitzgerald; Songfeng Guo Journal: Med Eng Phys Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 2.242
Authors: Brad E Dicianno; Donald M Spaeth; Rory A Cooper; Shirley G Fitzgerald; Michael L Boninger; Karl W Brown Journal: IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Donald M Spaeth; Harshal Mahajan; Amol Karmarkar; Diane Collins; Rory A Cooper; Michael L Boninger Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 3.966