A Kerr1, V P Pomeroy, P J Rowe, P Dall, D Rafferty. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, 106 Rottenrow, Glasgow G4 0NW, United Kingdom. a.kerr@strath.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Restoring movement fluency is a key focus for physical rehabilitation; it's measurement, however, lacks objectivity. The purpose of this study was to find whether measurable movement fluency variables differed between groups of adults with different movement abilities whilst performing the sit-to-walk (STW) movement. The movement fluency variables were: (1) hesitation during movement (reduction in forward velocity of the centre of mass; CoM), (2) coordination (percentage of temporal overlap of joint rotations) and (3) smoothness (number of inflections in the CoM jerk signal). METHODS: Kinematic data previously collected for another study were extracted for three groups: older adults (n=18), older adults at risk of falling (OARF, n=18), and younger adults (n=20). Each subject performed the STW movement freely while a motion analysis system tracked 11 body segments. The fluency variables were derived from the processed kinematic data and tested for group variation using analysis of variance. FINDINGS: All three variables showed statistically significant differences among the groups. Hesitation (F=15.11, p<0.001) was greatest in the OARF 47.5% (SD 18.0), compared to older adults 30.3% (SD 15.9) and younger adults 20.8% (SD 11.4). Co-ordination (F=44.88, p<0.001) was lowest for the OARF (6.93%, SD 10.99) compared to both the young (31.21%, SD 5.48) and old (26.24%, SD 5.84). Smoothness (F=35.96, p<0.001) was best in the younger adults, 18.3 (SD 5.2) inflections, compared to the old, 42.5 (SD 11.5) and OARF, 44.25 (SD 7.29). INTERPRETATION: Hesitation, co-ordination and smoothness may be valid indicators of movement fluency in adults, with important consequences for research and clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Restoring movement fluency is a key focus for physical rehabilitation; it's measurement, however, lacks objectivity. The purpose of this study was to find whether measurable movement fluency variables differed between groups of adults with different movement abilities whilst performing the sit-to-walk (STW) movement. The movement fluency variables were: (1) hesitation during movement (reduction in forward velocity of the centre of mass; CoM), (2) coordination (percentage of temporal overlap of joint rotations) and (3) smoothness (number of inflections in the CoM jerk signal). METHODS: Kinematic data previously collected for another study were extracted for three groups: older adults (n=18), older adults at risk of falling (OARF, n=18), and younger adults (n=20). Each subject performed the STW movement freely while a motion analysis system tracked 11 body segments. The fluency variables were derived from the processed kinematic data and tested for group variation using analysis of variance. FINDINGS: All three variables showed statistically significant differences among the groups. Hesitation (F=15.11, p<0.001) was greatest in the OARF 47.5% (SD 18.0), compared to older adults 30.3% (SD 15.9) and younger adults 20.8% (SD 11.4). Co-ordination (F=44.88, p<0.001) was lowest for the OARF (6.93%, SD 10.99) compared to both the young (31.21%, SD 5.48) and old (26.24%, SD 5.84). Smoothness (F=35.96, p<0.001) was best in the younger adults, 18.3 (SD 5.2) inflections, compared to the old, 42.5 (SD 11.5) and OARF, 44.25 (SD 7.29). INTERPRETATION: Hesitation, co-ordination and smoothness may be valid indicators of movement fluency in adults, with important consequences for research and clinical practice.
Authors: Achilles Vairis; Suzana Brown; Maurice Bess; Kyu Hyun Bae; Jonathan Boyack Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-15 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Elizabeth Ann Chandler; Thomas Stone; Valerie Moyra Pomeroy; Allan Brian Clark; Andrew Kerr; Phillip Rowe; Ukadike Chris Ugbolue; Jessica Smith; Nicola Joanne Hancock Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 4.003