EC Paediatrics

Background: Advances in technology allow the use of different systems in the training of motor performance. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of currently available technical interactive systems for the assessment and training of the upper extremity in humans, and challenges in their use, in relation to activities of daily life (ADL).

Method: A scoping review was conducted, using the search engines PubMed, Web of Science and Embase.

Results: In total, 160 papers were selected. Three main categories of technology were identified: camera-based, sensor-based, and combination systems. Sensor-based technology was most frequently used, with Inertial Measurement Units and accelerometer sensors. Combination systems included different technologies, such as Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, game rehabilitation systems, internet-based systems, and 3D electromagnetic systems. Outcome, aim of each technology, different target populations, and placement on the upper extremity (UE) are summarized for those three categories.

Conclusion: This scoping review evaluates various technologies for assessing and training UE motor performance in ADL in individuals with impairments. The review identifies a lack of a single comprehensive tool to effectively measure and improve multiple outcomes, including task-specific strength in the UE and object positioning during ADL or movement. Our findings suggest the need to develop technologies that can serve as comprehensive tools for the assessment and training of UE motor performance in individuals with impairments.

 Keyword: Technology; Upper Extremity; Activity of Daily Life; Rehabilitation

1. Lafferty M. “Book Reviews: Movement Skill Assessment. Burton, A.W. and Miller, D.E. Human Kinetics Pub., 1998, ISBN 0-87322-975-4, 407pp. £25”. European Physical Education Review 2 (1998): 172-172.
2. Schmidt RA and Wrisberg CA. “Motor Learning and Performance: A Situation-Based Learning Approach”. Human Kinetics (2008).
3. Bax M., et al. “Proposed definition and classification of cerebral palsy”. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 8 (2005): 571-576.
4. Boyd GW. “An evolution-based hypothesis on the origin and mechanisms of autoimmune disease”. Immunology and Cell Biology 5 (1997): 503-507.
5. Fehlings D., et al. “Botulinum toxin type A injections in the spastic upper extremity of children with hemiplegia: child characteristics that predict a positive outcome”. European Journal of Neurology 5 (2001): 145-149.
6. Cortes M., et al. “Improved motor performance in chronic spinal cord injury following upper-limb robotic training”. NeuroRehabilitation1 (2013): 57-65.
7. World Health Organization, ed. “International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF”. World Health Organization (2001).
8. Dekkers KJFM., et al. “Upper extremity muscle strength in children with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy: a bilateral problem?” Physical Therapy 12 (2020): 2205-2216.
9. Schrama PPM., et al. “Intraexaminer reliability of hand-held dynamometry in the upper extremity: a systematic review”. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation12 (2014): 2444-2469.
10. Geijen M., et al. “Exploring relevant parameters and investigating their reproducibility of task-oriented unimanual strength measurement in children with unilateral cerebral palsy”. Disability and Rehabilitation (2023): 1-7.
11. Reinkensmeyer DJ and Boninger ML. “Technologies and combination therapies for enhancing movement training for people with a disability”. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation1 (2012): 17.
12. Brunton LK. “Descriptive report of the impact of fatigue and current management strategies in cerebral palsy”. Pediatric Physical Therapy 2 (2018): 135-141.
13. Wang Q., et al. “Interactive wearable systems for upper body rehabilitation: a systematic review”. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1 (2017): 20.
14. Vanmechelen I., et al. “Assessment of movement disorders using wearable sensors during upper limb tasks: A scoping review”. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 9 (2023): 1068413.
15. JY C., et al. “Virtual reality rehabilitation in children with brain injury: a randomized controlled trial”. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 4 (2021): 480-487.
16. Bobin M., et al. “Design and study of a smart cup for monitoring the arm and hand activity of stroke patients”. IEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine 6 (2018): 2100812.
17. Mazzoleni S., et al. “Whole-body isometric force/torque measurements for functional assessment in neuro-rehabilitation: platform design, development and verification”. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 6 (2009): 38.
18. Lu L., et al. “Wearable health devices in health care: narrative systematic review”. JMIR MHealth and UHealth11 (2020): e18907.
19. Windolf M., et al. “Systematic accuracy and precision analysis of video motion capturing systems-exemplified on the Vicon-460 system”. Journal of Biomechanics 12 (2008): 2776-2780.
20. Metcalf C., et al. “Markerless motion capture and measurement of hand kinematics: validation and application to home-based upper limb rehabilitation”. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 8 (2013): 2184-2193.
21. Lahkar BK., et al. “Accuracy of a markerless motion capture system in estimating upper extremity kinematics during boxing”. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 4 (2022): 939980.
22. Kim GJ., et al. “The use of wearable sensors to assess and treat the upper extremity after stroke: a scoping review”. Disability and Rehabilitation 20 (2022): 6119-6138.
23. Mohan A., et al. “A sensorized glove and ball for monitoring hand rehabilitation therapy in stroke patients - 2013 Texas instruments India educators’ conference (TIIEC 2013)”. 2013 Tex Instrum INDIA Educ Conf TIIEC 2013. Published online (2013): 321-327.
24. A M., et al. “Recognition of daily gestures with wearable inertial rings and bracelets”. Sensors8 (2016): 1341.
25. Tramontano M., et al. “Sensor-based technology for upper limb rehabilitation in patients with multiple sclerosis: A randomized controlled trial”. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience 4 (2020): 333-341.
26. Pérez R., et al. “Upper limb portable motion analysis system based on inertial technology for neurorehabilitation purposes”. Sensors12 (2010): 10733-10751.
27. Chen Y., et al. “Home-based technologies for stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review”. International Journal of Medical Informatics 123 (2019): 11-22.
28. Levin MF., et al. “Emergence of virtual reality as a tool for upper limb rehabilitation: incorporation of motor control and motor learning principles”. Physical Therapy 3 (2015): 415-425.
29. AM K., et al. “Upper limb kinetic analysis of three sitting pivot wheelchair transfer techniques”. Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon 9 (2011): 923-929.