Comparison of upper limb kinematics in two activities of daily living with different handling requirements.

INTRODUCTION: Recently, kinematic analysis of the drinking task (DRINK) has been recommended to assess the quality of upper limb (UL) movement after stroke, but the accomplishment of this task may become difficult for poststroke patients with hand impairment. Therefore, it is necessary to study ADLs that involve a simpler interaction with a daily life target, such as the turning on a light task (LIGHT). As the knowledge of movement performed by healthy adults becomes essential to assess the quality of movement of poststroke patients, the main goal of this article was to compare the kinematic strategies used by healthy adults in LIGHT with those that are used in DRINK. METHODS: 63 adults, aged 30 to 69 years old, drank water and turned on a light, using both ULs separately, while seated. The movements of both tasks were captured by a 3D motion capture system. End-point and joint kinematics of reaching and returning phases were analysed. A multifactorial analysis of variance with repeated measures was applied to the kinematic metrics, using age, sex, body mass index and dominance as main factors. RESULTS: Mean and peak velocities, index of curvature, shoulder flexion and elbow extension were lower in LIGHT, which suggests that the real hand trajectory was smaller in this task. In LIGHT, reaching was less smooth and returning was smoother than DRINK. The instant of peak velocity was similar in both tasks. There was a minimal anterior trunk displacement in LIGHT, and a greater anterior trunk displacement in DRINK. Age and sex were the main factors which exerted effect on some of the kinematics, especially in LIGHT. CONCLUSION: The different target formats and hand contact in DRINK and LIGHT seem to be responsible for differences in velocity profile, efficiency, smoothness, joint angles and trunk displacement. Results suggest that the real hand trajectory was smaller in LIGHT and that interaction with the switch seems to be less demanding than with the glass. Accordingly, LIGHT could be a good option for the assessment of poststroke patients without grasping ability. Age and sex seem to be the main factors to be considered in future studies for a better match between healthy and poststroke adults.

Methodological considerations for kinematic analysis of upper limbs in healthy and poststroke adults Part II: a systematic review of motion capture systems and kinematic metrics.

Background and purpose: To review the methods used to analyze the kinematics of upper limbs (ULs) of healthy and poststroke adults, namely the motion capture systems and kinematic metrics. Summary of review: A database of articles published in the last decade was compiled using the following search terms combinations: ("upper extremity" OR "upper limb" OR arm) AND (kinematic OR motion OR movement) AND (analysis OR assessment OR measurement). The articles included in this review: (1) had the purpose to analyze objectively three-dimension kinematics of ULs, (2) studied functional movements or activities of daily living involving ULs, and (3) studied healthy and/or poststroke adults. Fourteen articles were included (four studied a healthy sample, three analyzed poststroke patients, and seven examined both poststroke and healthy participants). Conclusion: Most articles used optoelectronic systems with markers; however, the presentation of laboratory and task-specific errors is missing. Markerless systems, used in some studies, seem to be promising alternatives for implementation of kinematic analysis in hospitals and clinics, but the literature proving their validity is scarce. Most articles analyzed "joint kinematics" and "end-point kinematics," mainly related with reaching. The different stroke locations of the samples were not considered in their analysis and only three articles described their psychometric properties. Implication of key findings: Future research should validate portable motion capture systems, document their specific error at the acquisition place and for the studied task, include grasping and manipulation analysis, and describe psychometric properties.