Literature DB >> 33571311

Application of machine learning to the identification of joint degrees of freedom involved in abnormal movement during upper limb prosthesis use.

Sophie L Wang1,2, Conor Bloomer1, Gene Civillico3, Kimberly Kontson1.   

Abstract

To evaluate movement quality of upper limb (UL) prosthesis users, performance-based outcome measures have been developed that examine the normalcy of movement as compared to a person with a sound, intact hand. However, the broad definition of "normal movement" and the subjective nature of scoring can make it difficult to know which areas of the body to evaluate, and the expected magnitude of deviation from normative movement. To provide a more robust approach to characterizing movement differences, the goals of this work are to identify degrees of freedom (DOFs) that will inform abnormal movement for several tasks using unsupervised machine learning (clustering methods) and elucidate the variations in movement approach across two upper-limb prosthesis devices with varying DOFs as compared to healthy controls. 24 participants with no UL disability or impairment were recruited for this study and trained on the use of a body-powered bypass (n = 6) or the DEKA limb bypass (n = 6) prosthetic devices or included as normative controls. 3D motion capture data were collected from all participants as they performed the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test (JHFT) and targeted Box and Blocks Test (tBBT). Range of Motion, peak angle, angular path length, mean angle, peak angular velocity, and number of zero crossings were calculated from joint angle data for the right/left elbows, right/left shoulders, torso, and neck and fed into a K-means clustering algorithm. Results show right shoulder and torso DOFs to be most informative in distinguishing between bypass user and norm group movement. The JHFT page turning task and the seated tBBT elicit movements from bypass users that are most distinctive from the norm group. Results can be used to inform the development of movement quality scoring methodology for UL performance-based outcome measures. Identifying tasks across two different devices with known variations in movement can inform the best tasks to perform in a rehabilitation setting that challenge the prosthesis user's ability to achieve normative movement.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33571311      PMCID: PMC7877744          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246795

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  51 in total

1.  Controlling a multi-degree of freedom upper limb prosthesis using foot controls: user experience.

Authors:  Linda Resnik; Shana Lieberman Klinger; Katherine Etter; Christopher Fantini
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol       Date:  2013-07-31

2.  Assessment of body-powered upper limb prostheses by able-bodied subjects, using the Box and Blocks Test and the Nine-Hole Peg Test.

Authors:  Liz Haverkate; Gerwin Smit; Dick H Plettenburg
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 1.895

3.  An Integrated Movement Analysis Framework to Study Upper Limb Function: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Kimberly L Kontson; Ian P Marcus; Barbara M Myklebust; Eugene F Civillico
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 3.802

4.  Kinematic comparison of the wrist movements that are possible with a biomechatronics wrist prosthesis and a body-powered prosthesis: a preliminary study.

Authors:  N A Abd Razak; N A Abu Osman; W A B Wan Abas
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol       Date:  2012-07-25

5.  Using Wearable Sensors and Machine Learning Models to Separate Functional Upper Extremity Use From Walking-Associated Arm Movements.

Authors:  Adam McLeod; Elaine M Bochniewicz; Peter S Lum; Rahsaan J Holley; Geoff Emmer; Alexander W Dromerick
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2015-10-03       Impact factor: 3.966

6.  Compensatory strategies of body-powered prosthesis users reveal primary reliance on trunk motion and relation to skill level.

Authors:  Aïda M Valevicius; Quinn A Boser; Craig S Chapman; Patrick M Pilarski; Albert H Vette; Jacqueline S Hebert
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2019-12-09       Impact factor: 2.063

7.  Accuracy of the Microsoft Kinect sensor for measuring movement in people with Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Brook Galna; Gillian Barry; Dan Jackson; Dadirayi Mhiripiri; Patrick Olivier; Lynn Rochester
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 2.840

8.  Changes in performance over time while learning to use a myoelectric prosthesis.

Authors:  Hanneke Bouwsema; Corry K van der Sluis; Raoul M Bongers
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 4.262

9.  Validity and reliability of arm abduction angle measured on smartphone: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas; Cristina Roldán-Jiménez
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-02-20       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  User experience of controlling the DEKA Arm with EMG pattern recognition.

Authors:  Linda J Resnik; Frantzy Acluche; Shana Lieberman Klinger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.