The acceleration-velocity relationship: Identification of normal and spastic upper extremity movement

This study defines and evaluates a non-invasive technique that will identify a spasm as an uncommanded movement (U) from a normally commanded movement (C). Upper arm function during a tracking task is recognized as non-linear and characterized by a phase plane with acceleration (second derivative of stick position) plotted on the ordinate and velocity (first derivative of stick position) plotted on the abscissa. An acceleration time constant (tau A) is defined as (VA/AM) where AM is the maximal acceleration and VA is the velocity at AM. A deceleration time constant (tau D) is also defined as (VD/DM), where DM is the maximal deceleration and VD is the velocity at DM. Ten spastic subjects (S) were categorized into three groups of mildly spastic (M), intermediately spastic (I), and highly spastic (H) which were compared to five normal subjects (N). The results indicate that for C and U, both VA and AM are significantly lower for S at all three levels as compared to N. tau A is significantly higher for M and I as compared to N. Both VD and tau D are significantly higher for S at all three levels when compared to N. DM is significantly lower for S at all three levels of S when compared to N. Finally, AM and tau A significantly differentiate C vs U for M. VA and tau D significantly differentiate for I. VA, AM as well as DM, tau D significantly differentiate for H. The physical significance of these results is discussed with respect to the time course and magnitude of net muscle moment (M), and the reversal of the agonist-antagonist relationship during the acceleration and deceleration phases. Finally, a spasm identification algorithm is proposed.

[1]  Ernest O. Doebelin,et al.  Dynamic Analysis and Feedback Control , 1962 .

[2]  P. A. Lynn,et al.  Assessment of recovery of arm control in hemiplegic stroke patients. 2. Comparison of arm function tests and pursuit tracking in relation to clinical recovery. , 1980, International rehabilitation medicine.

[3]  S. Haley,et al.  Description and Interobserver Reliability of the Tufts Assessment of Motor Performance , 1988, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[4]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Man-machine systems;: Information, control, and decision models of human performance , 1974 .

[5]  M Hammerton,et al.  An investigation into the comparative suitability of forearm, hand and thumb controls in aquisition tasks. , 1966, Ergonomics.

[6]  C A Phillips,et al.  The revised velocity-strain relationship: phase-plane analysis of left ventricular function and dysfunction. , 1995, Medical engineering & physics.

[7]  Daniel W. Repperger,et al.  An Algorithm to Ascertain Critical Regions of Human Tracking Ability , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[8]  R L Hewer,et al.  Assessment of recovery of arm control in hemiplegic stroke patients. 1. Arm function tests. , 1980, International rehabilitation medicine.

[9]  M.I.E.Aust.,et al.  Methods for Measuring the Characteristics of Movements of Motor-Impaired Children , 1990 .

[10]  David A. Winter,et al.  Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement , 1990 .

[11]  T Bajd,et al.  Testing and modelling of spasticity. , 1982, Journal of biomedical engineering.

[12]  W. Rymer,et al.  A quantitative analysis of pendular motion of the lower leg in spastic human subjects , 1991, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[13]  Daniel W. Repperger,et al.  Enhanced metrics for identification of forearm rehabilitation , 1995 .

[14]  Ivan T. Draper Gilles de la Tourette's Syndrome , 1977 .

[15]  D. Carroll,et al.  A QUANTITATIVE TEST OF UPPER EXTREMITY FUNCTION. , 1965, Journal of chronic diseases.

[16]  D. Corcos,et al.  Movement deficits caused by hyperexcitable stretch reflexes in spastic humans. , 1986, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[17]  Tamara L. Chelette,et al.  Construction of a Dual Axis Force Reflection Stick and Test Station , 1991 .