| Literature DB >> 25324827 |
Alessandro G Allievi1, Tomoki Arichi2, Anne L Gordon3, Etienne Burdet1.
Abstract
There is a pressing need for new techniques capable of providing accurate information about sensorimotor function during the first 2 years of childhood. Here, we review current clinical methods and challenges for assessing motor function in early infancy, and discuss the potential benefits of applying technology-assisted methods. We also describe how the use of these tools with neuroimaging, and in particular functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), can shed new light on the intra-cerebral processes underlying neurodevelopmental impairment. This knowledge is of particular relevance in the early infant brain, which has an increased capacity for compensatory neural plasticity. Such tools could bring a wealth of knowledge about the underlying pathophysiological processes of diseases such as cerebral palsy; act as biomarkers to monitor the effects of possible therapeutic interventions; and provide clinicians with much needed early diagnostic information.Entities:
Keywords: MRI; cerebral palsy; developmental assessment; functional MRI; motor assessment; robotic-assisted assessment
Year: 2014 PMID: 25324827 PMCID: PMC4181230 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2014.00197
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Figure 1Instrumented sorting block toy. The traditional sorting block is a relatively complex toy for young children, which ultimately requires good spatial orientation, grasp control, force control, and motion planning. In this instrumented version of the toy, the block has been equipped with an inertial measuring unit (B) to track and record the object’s orientation and linear accelerations during grasping, manipulation, and reaching tasks (A).
Summary of studies that have developed instrumented toys to quantitatively assess movement in young children.
| Study | Design | Age group | Measures | Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Campolo et al. 2008 ( | Instrumented ball toy sensorized with inertial units (accelerometer, magnetometer, and gyroscope) and custom-made force sensors (0–20 N) | 6 months and above, intended for children suffering from autistic spectrum disorders | Applied force Spatial orientation and acceleration of object movement | Not formally tested with infant subjects |
| Cecchi et al. 2008 ( | Instrumented rattle, sensorized with inertial units (accelerometer, magnetometer, and gyroscope) and binary contact sensors | 9 months and above | Grip shape Spatial orientation and acceleration of movements | Preliminary test with three infants (24 months old) showed typical 3–4 finger grasp patterns |
| Cecchi et al. 2010 ( | “Biomechatronic gym” (instrumented baby play gym) consisting of three toys (cow-toy, flower-toy, and ring-toy) integrated with visual and auditory stimuli. Toys contain piezo-resistive pressure sensors (0–5 psi) and force sensing resistors (0–20 N) | 4–9 months old | Palmar (power) and precision grasp: applied pressure and force range Distinction between lateralized or centralized activity defined by position of toy during play with respect to midline | Tested longitudinally with seven infants: Central tasks: trend toward decreasing bimanual activity (and increasing unimanual activity) with increasing age for central tasks |
| Lateral tasks: significant increase in contralateral action with increasing age | ||||
| Increase in occurrence of precision grasp and reduction in occurrence of power grasp with increasing age. Force applied during both grasp types increases with age | ||||
| Klein et al. 2011 ( | Instrumented block sorting toy, sensorized with force sensors, and infra-red proximity sensors | Age range not specified | Applied force on object lid as a function of shape and location | Tested with nine blind-folded healthy adult volunteers, showed significant performance improvement with learning |
| Correct insertion of object, task completion time, number of mistrials, and percentage of time spent far from the target | ||||
| Campolo et al. 2012 ( | Instrumented block-box toy, sensorized with magneto-inertial sensors | 12–36 months old | Tracking orientation during object placement | Tested with four healthy infants (14–25 months old) for acceptability |
| Vertical and horizontal alignment errors and insertion time | ||||
| Serio et al. 2012 ( | Commercially bought horseshoe-shaped toy, sensorized with silicon chamber for pressure measurement (0–5 psi) | 4–9 months old | Bimanual applied pressure during power grasp | Not formally tested with infant subjects |
Suggested requirements for an fMRI compatible robotic device.
| Contain no ferrous materials and be fully MRI/fMRI compatible |
| Be mechanically safe to avoid distress or possible harm to the infant |
| Be able to provide stimulation synchronized with fMRI acquisition |
| Be able to induce stimulation patterns at a controlled amplitude and frequency capable of eliciting robust functional responses |
| Be possible to monitor the operation of the stimulus remotely to ensure consistent stimulation was occurring and that no potentially harmful events could occur |
| Be light, small, and flexible enough to avoid the infant suffering movement restriction or discomfort |
| Not additionally induce head movements and so avoid resulting image artifacts |
| Be easily cleanable to prevent infection spreading from one infant to another |
| Be capable of presenting a stimulation type and pattern, which is appropriate for the neurodevelopmental stage of the study population |
Figure 2Schematic diagram of an fMRI compatible robotic device control system. The robotic device can be controlled remotely via a control box located in the MRI control room. Actuation of the device can be achieved via timed opening of the proportional valve, which allows pressurized air through the pneumatic connection (running through the axis waveguide) to the device in the MRI examination room. Complete control of the system is achieved via a user interface running on PC software, and integration of the multimodal information through a data acquisition unit.
Figure 3Functional magnetic resonance imaging compatible devices can be used to precisely map functional activity and axonal pathways. The devices are fitted to the subjects’ limbs prior to scanning, and can provide a safe and reproducible pattern of stimulation, which is fully automated and synchronized with fMRI data acquisition. Shown are devices fitted to the wrist (A) and ankle (B). In a preterm infant at 35 + 4 weeks post-menstrual age, this approach can then be used to identify localized clusters of functional response (C) using fMRI (green cluster identified with passive movement of the left ankle, and red following passive movement of the left wrist), and their underlying structural connections can be delineated using diffusion tractography (D).