Learning effects of repetitive administration of the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure in novice prosthetic users.

OBJECTIVE The Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP) evaluates the functionality of normal, injured or prosthetic hands. The aim was to evaluate the learning effects of SHAP tasks and the appropriateness of the time limits applied per task in novice prosthetic users. METHODS Right-handed unimpaired volunteers (n = 24, mean age 21.8 years) completed 8 SHAP sessions over 5 consecutive days using a prosthetic simulator. The execution times of SHAP tasks were transformed into 6 prehensile patterns, the functionality profile, and the index of function, a general functionality score. Learning effects in task times were analysed using multilevel analysis. RESULTS Learning effects occurred in all SHAP tasks. Tasks, sex, sessions, tasks-sessions interaction, and the first session of the day contributed (p < 0.01) to the execution times. Tasks were performed more slowly by females and more slowly on the first session of the day. In several tasks time limits were exceeded by > 25% of participants in at least the first 3 sessions, which affected the calculation of the functionality profile and index of function scores. CONCLUSION The learning effects of SHAP in novice prosthetic users require consideration when conducting a reliability study. SHAP scores in novice prosthetic-hand users are confounded by learning effects and exceeded time limits.

[1]  Paul J. Hoffman,et al.  Test reliability and practice effects , 1963 .

[2]  R. Bornstein.  Normative data on intermanual differences on three tests of motor performance. , 1986, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[3]  M. Marini,et al.  Sex and gender: What do we know? , 1990 .

[4]  R M Ruff,et al.  Gender- and Age-Specific Changes in Motor Speed and Eye-Hand Coordination in Adults: Normative Values for the Finger Tapping and Grooved Pegboard Tests , 1993, Perceptual and motor skills.

[5]  J. Larson,et al.  Maximal inspiratory pressure. Learning effect and test-retest reliability in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. , 1993, Chest.

[6]  R. Humphry,et al.  Development of in-hand manipulation and relationship with activities. , 1995, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[7]  Test-retest reliability of the lateral step-up test in young adult healthy subjects. , 1997, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[8]  M R Cohen,et al.  Individual and Sex Differences in Speed of Handwriting among High School Students , 1997, Perceptual and motor skills.

[9]  Peter J. Kyberd,et al.  A Critical Review of Functionality Assessment in Natural and Prosthetic Hands , 1999 .

[10]  Colin Michael Light.  An intelligent hand prosthesis and evaluation of pathological and prosthetic hand function , 2000 .

[11]  K. Newell,et al.  Time scales in motor learning and development. , 2001, Psychological review.

[12]  C. Light,et al.  Establishing a standardized clinical assessment tool of pathologic and prosthetic hand function: normative data, reliability, and validity. , 2002, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[13]  Jeffrey Jutai,et al.  Evaluation of the validity of the prosthetic upper extremity functional index for children. , 2003, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[14]  E. Carmeli,et al.  The aging hand. , 2003, The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences.

[15]  M. Corballis,et al.  Influence of Task Complexity on Manual Asymmetries , 2004, Cortex.

[16]  K. Junaid,et al.  Gender Differences in the Attainment of Motor Skills on the Movement Assessment Battery for Children , 2006, Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics.

[17]  Robert Burkard,et al.  Learning effects of repetitive administrations of the sensory organization test in healthy young adults. , 2007, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[18]  Cheryl Metcalf.  The Relationship between Movement and Function of the Wrist and Hand: A Clinically Focused Kinematic Study , 2008 .

[19]  Cheryl D Metcalf,et al.  Changes in Hand Function with Age and Normative Unimpaired Scores when Measured with the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure , 2008 .

[20]  S. Hubbard.  Pediatric Upper Limb Outcome Measurement , 2009 .

[21]  Kevin Warwick,et al.  Case Studies to Demonstrate the Range of Applications of the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure , 2009 .

[22]  Øyvind Stavdahl,et al.  Upper Limb Prosthetic Outcome Measures (ULPOM): A Working Group and Their Findings , 2009 .

[23]  Avi Karni,et al.  Sex differences in motor performance and motor learning in children and adolescents: An increasing male advantage in motor learning and consolidation phase gains , 2009, Behavioural Brain Research.

[24]  Virginia Wright,et al.  Prosthetic Outcome Measures for Use With Upper Limb Amputees: A Systematic Review of the Peer-Reviewed Literature, 1970 to 2009 , 2009 .

[25]  Laura A. Miller,et al.  Summary and Recommendations of the Academy's State of the Science Conference on Upper Limb Prosthetic Outcome Measures , 2009 .

[26]  P. Giraud,et al.  Analyzing multiple learning effects in health care using multilevel modeling: Application to radiotherapy at an early stage of innovation , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[27]  C. K. van der Sluis,et al.  Learning to control opening and closing a myoelectric hand. , 2010, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[28]  C. K. van der Sluis,et al.  The i-LIMB Hand and the DMC Plus Hand Compared: A Case Report , 2010, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[29]  Peter J Kyberd.  The influence of control format and hand design in single axis myoelectric hands: assessment of functionality of prosthetic hands using the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure , 2011, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[30]  Raoul M Bongers,et al.  Intermanual Transfer in Training With an Upper-Limb Myoelectric Prosthesis Simulator: A Mechanistic, Randomized, Pretest-Posttest Study , 2012, Physical Therapy.

[31]  Hanneke Bouwsema,et al.  Determining skill level in myoelectric prosthesis use with multiple outcome measures. , 2012, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[32]  Hanneke Bouwsema,et al.  Changes in performance over time while learning to use a myoelectric prosthesis , 2012, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[33]  Raoul M Bongers,et al.  Functionality of i-LIMB and i-LIMB pulse hands: case report. , 2013, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.