Force/moment tracking performance during constant-pose, force-varying, bilaterally symmetric, hand-wrist tasks. (April 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zhu, Ziling; Martinez-Luna, Carlos; Li, Jianan; McDonald, Benjamin E.; Huang, Xinming; Farrell, Todd R.; Clancy, Edward A.
• Is Part Of: Journal of electromyography and kinesiology. Volume 69(2023)
• Publication Date: 2023-04
• Subjects: Bilateral movement -- Target tracking -- Visual feedback -- Between-limb difference -- Symmetric movement; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Kinesiology -- Periodicals; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Movement -- physiology -- Periodicals; Muscles -- physiology -- Periodicals; Électromyographie -- Périodiques; Cinésiologie -- Périodiques; Electromyography; Kinesiology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.740757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2023.102753
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1050-6411

Abstract

Abstract: Bilateral movement is widely used for calibration of myoelectric prosthesis controllers, and is also relevant as rehabilitation therapy for patients with motor impairment and for athletic training. Target tracking and/or force matching tasks can be used to elicit such bilateral movement. Limited descriptive accuracy data exist in able-bodied subjects for bilateral target tracking or dominant vs non-dominant dynamic force matching tasks requiring more than one degree of freedom (DoF). We examined dynamic trajectory (0.75 Hz band-limited, white, uniform random) constant-posture, hand open-close, wrist pronation-supination target tracking and matching tasks. Tasks were normalized to maximum voluntary contraction (MVC), spanning a ± 30% MVC force range, in four 1-DoF and 2-DoF tasks: (1, 2) unilateral dominant limb tracking with/without visual feedback, and (3, 4) bilateral dominant/non-dominant limb tracking with mirror visual feedback. In 12 able-bodied subjects, unilateral tracking error with visual feedback averaged 10–15 %MVC, but up to 30 %MVC without visual feedback. Bilateral matching error averaged ∼10 %MVC and was affected little by visual feedback type, so long as feedback was provided. In 1-DoF bilateral tracking, the dominant side had statistically lower error than the non-dominant side. In 2-DoF bilateral tracking, the side providing mirror visual feedback exhibited lower error than the opposite side. In 2-DoF tasks (assumed to be more challenging than their constituent 1-DoF tracking tasks), hand grip force errors grew disproportionately larger than those of each wrist DoF. In unilateral 1-DoF tasks, both hand vs target and wrist vs target latency averaged 250–350 ms. In unilateral 2-DoF tasks, wrist vs target latency also averaged 250–350 ms, while hand vs target latency averaged > 500 ms. These results provide guidance on bilateral 2-DoF hand-wrist performance in target tracking, and dominant vs non-dominant force matching tasks.