Dataset Information

Detection of Pediatric Upper Extremity Motor Activity and Deficits With Accelerometry.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Affordable, quantitative methods to screen children for developmental delays are needed. Motor milestones can be an indicator of developmental delay and may be used to track developmental progress. Accelerometry offers a way to gather real-world information about pediatric motor behavior.

Objective

To develop a referent cohort of pediatric accelerometry from bilateral upper extremities (UEs) and determine whether movement can accurately distinguish those with and without motor deficits.

Design, setting, and participants

Children aged 0 to 17 years participated in a prospective cohort from December 8, 2014, to December 29, 2017. Children were recruited from Ranken Jordan Pediatric Bridge Hospital, Maryland Heights, Missouri, and Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri. Typically developing children were included as a referent cohort if they had no history of motor or neurological deficit; consecutive sampling and matching ensured equal representation of sex and age. Children with diagnosed asymmetric motor deficits were included in the motor impaired cohort.

Exposures

Bilateral UE motor activity was measured using wrist-worn accelerometers for a total of 100 hours in 25-hour increments.

Main outcomes and measures

To characterize bilateral UE motor activity in a referent cohort for the purpose of detecting irregularities in the future, total activity and the use ratio between UEs were used to describe typically developing children. Asymmetric impairment was classified using the mono-arm use index (MAUI) and bilateral-arm use index (BAUI) to quantify the acceleration of unilateral movements.

Results

A total of 216 children enrolled, and 185 children were included in analysis. Of these, 156 were typically developing, with mean (SD) age 9.1 (5.1) years and 81 boys (52.0%). There were 29 children in the motor impaired cohort, with mean (SD) age 7.4 (4.4) years and 16 boys (55.2%). The combined MAUI and BAUI (mean [SD], 0.86 [0.005] and use ratio (mean [SD], 0.90 [0.008]) had similar F1 values. The area under the curve was also similar between the combined MAUI and BAUI (mean [SD], 0.98 [0.004]) and the use ratio (mean [SD], 0.98 [0.004]).

Conclusions and relevance

Bilateral UE movement as measured with accelerometry may provide a meaningful metric of real-world motor behavior across childhood. Screening in early childhood remains a challenge; MAUI may provide an effective method for clinicians to measure and visualize real-world motor behavior in children at risk for asymmetrical deficits.

SUBMITTER: Hoyt CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6487720 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Detection of Pediatric Upper Extremity Motor Activity and Deficits With Accelerometry.

Hoyt Catherine R CR Van Andrew N AN Ortega Mario M Koller Jonathan M JM Everett Elyse A EA Nguyen Annie L AL Lang Catherine E CE Schlaggar Bradley L BL Dosenbach Nico U F NUF

JAMA network open 20190405 4

<h4>Importance</h4>Affordable, quantitative methods to screen children for developmental delays are needed. Motor milestones can be an indicator of developmental delay and may be used to track developmental progress. Accelerometry offers a way to gather real-world information about pediatric motor behavior.<h4>Objective</h4>To develop a referent cohort of pediatric accelerometry from bilateral upper extremities (UEs) and determine whether movement can accurately distinguish those with and withou ...[more]

PMID: 31026032

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Upper limb (UL) paresis is one of the most common stroke consequences and significantly restricts patients in everyday life. Instruments objectively measuring direct arm use in stroke patients are lacking, but might be helpful to understand patients’ impairment. Aiming to examine whether accelerometry is a suitable objective measure for everyday UL use in stroke patients, we conducted a systematic review on the association between accelerometer-derived measurements and clinical scales. Methods Articles were systematically searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, PeDro and LIVIVO through December 12th, 2021, screened for inclusion by AH, and subsequently independently screened by CK and MK. Disagreements were discussed until consensus. We included English and German peer-reviewed articles dealing with the validity of accelerometers as a measurement of UL use in stroke patients and eligible systematic reviews. Studies exclusively using accelerometry as an outcome parameter, book contributions, conference abstracts and case studies were excluded. Data extraction was conducted by AH and confirmed by CK focussing on study type, objective, accelerometer device, sample size, stroke status, assessments conducted, measurement method, wearing time and key results. We analysed all eligible articles regarding the correlation between accelerometry and other clinical assessments and the validity in accordance with the type of accelerometer. Results Excluding duplicates, the initial search yielded 477 records. In the 34 eligible studies accelerometers was used with a predominance of tri-axial accelerometery (n = 12) and only few with two-axial application (n = 4). Regarding measures to examine association to accelerometer data different clinical scales were applied depending on the setting, the degree of impairment and/or the status of stroke. Cut-off values to determine correlations varied largely; most significant correlations are reported for the MAL [Range 0.31- 0.84] and the ARAT [Range 0.15–0.79]. Conclusions Accelerometers can provide reliable data about daily arm use frequency but do not supply information about the movements´ quality and restrictions on everyday activities of stroke patients. Depending on the context, it is advisable to use both, accelerometry and other clinical measures. According to the literature there is currently no accelerometer device most suitable to measure UL activity. High correlations indicate that multi-dimensional accelerometers should be preferred. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12883-022-02743-w.

Project description:BackgroundActivity limitations of the upper extremity are a common finding for individuals living with stroke. Mental practice (MP) is a training method that uses cognitive rehearsal of activities to improve performance of those activities.ObjectivesTo determine if MP improves the outcome of upper extremity rehabilitation for individuals living with the effects of stroke.Search strategyWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (November 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, November 2009), PubMed (1965 to November 2009), EMBASE (1980 to November 2009), CINAHL (1982 to November 2009), PsycINFO (1872 to November 2009), Scopus (1996 to November 2009), Web of Science (1955 to November 2009), the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), CIRRIE, REHABDATA, ongoing trials registers, and also handsearched relevant journals and searched reference lists.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials involving adults with stroke who had deficits in upper extremity function.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently selected trials for inclusion. We considered the primary outcome to be the ability of the arm to be used for appropriate tasks (i.e. arm function).Main resultsWe included six studies involving 119 participants. We combined studies that evaluated MP in addition to another treatment versus the other treatment alone. Mental practice in combination with other treatment appears more effective in improving upper extremity function than the other treatment alone (Z = 3.48, P = 0.0005; standardised mean difference (SMD) 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 2.15). We attempted subgroup analyses, based on time since stroke and dosage of MP; however, numbers in each group were small. We evaluated the quality of the evidence with the PEDro scale, ranging from 6 to 9 out of 10; we determined the GRADE score to be moderate.Authors' conclusionsThere is limited evidence to suggest that MP in combination with other rehabilitation treatment appears to be beneficial in improving upper extremity function after stroke, as compared with other rehabilitation treatment without MP. Evidence regarding improvement in motor recovery and quality of movement is less clear. There is no clear pattern regarding the ideal dosage of MP required to improve outcomes. Further studies are required to evaluate the effect of MP on time post stroke, volume of MP that is required to affect the outcomes and whether improvement is maintained long-term. Numerous large ongoing studies will soon improve the evidence base.

Project description:IntroductionThe use of dual-task model such as dual-task gait has been extensively studied to assess cognitive-motor performance among older adults. However, space restriction and safety factor limit its applications in remote assessment. To address the gap, we propose a video processing-based approach to remotely quantify cognitive-motor performance using a 20-s repetitive elbow flexion-extension test with dual-task condition, called video-based motoric-cognitive meter (MCM).MethodsEighteen older participants (age: 78.6 ± 6.5 years) who were clinically diagnosed as having either mild cognitive impairment or dementia were included in this study. Participants were asked to perform 20-s repetitive elbow flexion-extension exercise with a memory exercise by counting backward from a two-digit number. During the test, all movements of the forearm were recorded by a video camera. As a comparator, a validated wrist-worn sensor was used, which allowed quantifying upper extremity kinematics.ResultsThe results showed a good agreement (r ≥ 0.530 and ICC2,1 ≥ 0.681) between the derived dual-task upper extremity motor performance from the proposed video-based MCM and a clinically validated sensor-based MCM. We also observed moderate correlations (r ≥ 0.496) between some measures of video-based MCM (flexion time, extension time, and flexion-extension time) and clinical cognitive scale (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE]). Additionally, some measures of dual-task upper extremity motor performance (speed, flexion time, extension time, and flexion-extension time) were associated with dual-task gait speed (r ≥ 0.557), which has been found to be correlated with cognitive impairment. Lastly, the selected dual-task motor performance metric (flexion time) was sensitive to predict MMSE scores in linear regression analyses with statistical significance (adjusted R2 = 0.306, p = 0.025).ConclusionThis study proposes a video processing-based approach to analyze dual-task upper extremity motor performance from a simple and convenient upper extremity function test. The results indicate concurrent validity of the proposed video-based MCM compared with the sensor-based MCM, and associations between dual-task upper extremity motor performance and clinically validated cognitive markers (MMSE scores and dual-task gait). Future studies are warranted to explore sensitivity of this solution to promote remote assessment of cognitive-motor performance among older adults in telehealth applications.

Dataset Information

Detection of Pediatric Upper Extremity Motor Activity and Deficits With Accelerometry.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Detection of Pediatric Upper Extremity Motor Activity and Deficits With Accelerometry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets