Visualisation of upper limb activity using spirals

Chadwell, Alix; Kenney, Laurence; Granat, Malcolm H.; Thies, Sibylle B.; Head, John; Galpin, Adam

doi:10.1177/0309364617706751

Cited by 23 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…30 In the case of upper-limb studies, three papers related to the development of algorithms for the assessment of activity. 32,33,41 Two of these papers reported on the use of head mounted cameras for the development of grasp taxonomies. 32,41 The third paper reported on new techniques for the visualisation of data from wrist worn accelerometers, used to assess the relative levels of activity of the intact and prosthetic limbs.…”

Section: Figure 1 Flow Chart Of Selection and Sorting Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…32,41 The third paper reported on new techniques for the visualisation of data from wrist worn accelerometers, used to assess the relative levels of activity of the intact and prosthetic limbs. 33 This is a pre-print of the paper 'Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review', by Chadwell, Diment, Mico Amigo, Morgado Ramirez et al…”

Section: Figure 1 Flow Chart Of Selection and Sorting Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Factoring in these other aspects can provide greater understanding of the variations in an individual's activity, and provide better support for clinical scores and prosthetists' decisions. Some of upper-limb studies assessed wear-time, 33,46,91,92 but most lower-limb studies did not. Wear-time, in addition to the total amount of activity, could give a better indication of whether there are issues with prosthesis comfort and whether users find a prosthesis beneficial in all situations, or only in certain situations (for example, many may use a prosthesis in public but not in private, or only outdoors, not indoors).…”

Section: Benefits Of Activity Monitoring In Community-based Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All 4 upper-limb papers which related to the population category were output as part of the same research study; these papers compared the symmetry of upper-limb activity between those with limb-absence and anatomically intact control participants. 33,46,91,92 The results showed that the upper-limb activity of prosthesis users is heavily biased towards the anatomical limb, but in anatomically intact controls activity is quite evenly distributed between the dominant and non-dominant limbs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The upper-limb studies varied in the types of sensor used for monitoring activity. These methods of assessing activity were grouped into four topics: (1) use of head-mounted video cameras to generate grasp taxonomies, 32,41 (2) use of wrist-worn accelerometers to measure aspects of symmetry in upper-limb activity and prosthesis wear time, 33,46,91,92 (3) use of on-board sensing to evaluate choice of grasp, 58 and (4) use of on-board sensing to evaluate the use of a sensory feedback system and the number of grasp events. 47,71 During the review process, five other studies evaluating the upper-limb activity of prosthesis users were identified, however these were excluded from the main review due to assessing all upper-limb activity (as opposed to just the use of the prosthesis), 102,103 or because they were only undertaken as lab-based studies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell¹,

Diment²,

Amigo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUnderstanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis-users during daily-living.Results60 lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.ConclusionsActivity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user’s requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1 Flow Chart Of Selection and Sorting Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figure 1 Flow Chart Of Selection and Sorting Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Benefits Of Activity Monitoring In Community-based Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 98%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell¹,

Diment²,

Amigo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Spiro: Order-Preserving Visualization in High Performance Computing Monitoring

Dang,

Nguyen,

et al. 2023

Advances in Visual Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensor Measures of Symmetry Quantify Upper Limb Movement in the Natural Environment Across the Lifespan

Smith

Lang

2019

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge of upper limb activity in the natural environment is critical for evaluating the effectiveness of rehabilitation services. Wearable sensors allow efficient collection of these data, and have the potential to be less burdensome than self-report measures of activity. Sensors can capture many different variables of activity and daily performance, many of which could be useful in identifying deviation from typical movement behavior and/or measuring outcomes from rehabilitation interventions. While it has potential, sensor measurement is just emerging and there is a lack of consensus on which variables of daily performance are valid, sensitive, specific, and useful. We propose that symmetry of full-day upper limb movement is a key variable. We describe here that symmetry is valid, robustly observed within a narrow range across the lifespan in typical development, and shows evidence of being different in populations with neuromotor impairment. Key next steps include the determination of sensitivity, specificity, minimal detectable change, and minimal clinically important change/difference. This information is needed to determine whether an individual belongs to the typical or atypical group, whether or not change has occurred, and whether or not that change is beneficial.

show abstract

Visualisation of upper limb activity using spirals

Cited by 23 publications

References 28 publications

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Spiro: Order-Preserving Visualization in High Performance Computing Monitoring

Sensor Measures of Symmetry Quantify Upper Limb Movement in the Natural Environment Across the Lifespan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About