Quantifying age-related differences in human reaching while interacting with a rehabilitation robotic device

New movement assessment and data analysis methods are developed to quantify human arm motion patterns during physical interaction with robotic devices for rehabilitation. These methods provide metrics for future use in diagnosis, assessment and rehabilitation of subjects with affected arm movements. Specifically, the current study uses existing pattern recognition methods to evaluate the effect of age on performance of a specific motion, reaching to a target by moving the end-effector of a robot an X-Y table. Differences in the arm motion patterns of younger and older subjects are evaluated using two measures: the principal component analysis similarity factor SPCA to compare path shape and the number of Fourier modes representing 98% of the path 'energy' to compare the smoothness of movement, a particularly important variable for assessment of pathologic movement. Both measures are less sensitive to noise than others previously reported in the literature and preserve information that is often lost through other analysis techniques. Data from the SPCA analysis indicate that age is a significant factor affecting the shapes of target reaching paths, followed by reaching movement type crossing body midline/not crossing and reaching side left/right; hand dominance and trial repetition are not significant factors. Data from the Fourier-based analysis likewise indicate that age is a significant factor affecting smoothness of movement, and movements become smoother with increasing trial number in both younger and older subjects, although more rapidly so in younger subjects. These results using the proposed data analysis methods confirm current practice that age-matched subjects should be used for comparison to quantify recovery of arm movement during rehabilitation. The results also highlight the advantages that these methods offer relative to other reported measures.

[1]  F. Schmitt,et al.  Critical decline in fine motor hand movements in human aging. , 1999, Neurology.

[2]  S. Micera,et al.  Robotic techniques for upper limb evaluation and rehabilitation of stroke patients , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[3]  C. Granger,et al.  The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. , 1987, Advances in clinical rehabilitation.

[4]  T. Flash,et al.  The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model , 1985, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[5]  Mathias Hegele,et al.  Adaptation to direction-dependent visuo-motor rotations and its decay in younger and older adults. , 2008, Acta psychologica.

[6]  Natalia Dounskaia,et al.  Efficient control of arm movements in advanced age , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[7]  Corwin Boake,et al.  Normalized Movement Quality Measures for Therapeutic Robots Strongly Correlate With Clinical Motor Impairment Measures , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[8]  P. Dario,et al.  Design strategies to improve patient motivation during robot-aided rehabilitation , 2007, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[9]  J. Nadal,et al.  Application of principal component analysis in vertical ground reaction force to discriminate normal and abnormal gait. , 2009, Gait & posture.

[10]  W. Gersch,et al.  A smoothness priors long AR model method for spectral estimation , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[11]  Aldo Quattrone,et al.  Movement time and aging: a normative study in healthy subjects with the “Movement Time Analyzer®” , 2005, Aging clinical and experimental research.

[12]  C. Burgar,et al.  Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. , 2002, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[13]  Cyrus Shahabi,et al.  A PCA-based similarity measure for multivariate time series , 2004, MMDB '04.

[14]  W. Krzanowski Between-Groups Comparison of Principal Components , 1979 .

[15]  Ethan R. Buch,et al.  Visuomotor adaptation in normal aging. , 2003, Learning & memory.

[16]  H. Beppu,et al.  Analysis of cerebellar motor disorders by visually guided elbow tracking movement. , 1984, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[17]  B. Prilutsky,et al.  Gains in Upper Extremity Function After Stroke via Recovery or Compensation: Potential Differential Effects on Amount of Real-World Limb Use , 2009, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

[18]  J. S. Thomas,et al.  The Continuity of Movements , 1973 .

[19]  Stephan P. Swinnen,et al.  Principal Component Analysis of Complex Multijoint Coordinative Movements , 2005, Biological Cybernetics.

[20]  N. Hogan,et al.  Movement Smoothness Changes during Stroke Recovery , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[21]  E. Taub,et al.  The reliability of the wolf motor function test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[22]  G. Stelmach,et al.  Parkinsonism Reduces Coordination of Fingers, Wrist, and Arm in Fine Motor Control , 1997, Experimental Neurology.

[23]  N. Hogan,et al.  A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation , 2000, Neurology.

[24]  H. F. Machiel van der Loos,et al.  Development of robots for rehabilitation therapy: the Palo Alto VA/Stanford experience. , 2000, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[25]  George E Stelmach,et al.  Age-related kinematic differences as influenced by task difficulty, target size, and movement amplitude. , 2002, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[26]  Natalia Dounskaia,et al.  Control of multijoint drawing movements: a comparison of young and elderly adults , 2003, First International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, 2003. Conference Proceedings..

[27]  Donnell Crear,et al.  Design of an X-Y Table for Investigating And Rehabilitating Human Motor Control , 2006 .

[28]  M. Audiffren,et al.  Age-related differences in the preparatory processes of motor programming. , 1998, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[29]  Silvestro Micera,et al.  Characterization of age-related modifications of upper limb motor control strategies in a new dynamic environment , 2008, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.