Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple Sclerosis

Objective: To determine whether robotic metrics: (1) correlate with the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT; good convergent validity); and (2) differentiate between those self-reporting “some hand problems” versus “no hand problems” (good criterion validity). Design: Cross-sectional validation analyses. Setti...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nick W. Bray, PhD, Syed Z. Raza, MSc, Joselyn Romero Avila, BME(c), Caitlin J Newell, BSc, BA, Michelle Ploughman, PhD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2024-12-01
Series:Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109524000958
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850259839058444288
author Nick W. Bray, PhD
Syed Z. Raza, MSc
Joselyn Romero Avila, BME(c)
Caitlin J Newell, BSc, BA
Michelle Ploughman, PhD
author_facet Nick W. Bray, PhD
Syed Z. Raza, MSc
Joselyn Romero Avila, BME(c)
Caitlin J Newell, BSc, BA
Michelle Ploughman, PhD
author_sort Nick W. Bray, PhD
collection DOAJ
description Objective: To determine whether robotic metrics: (1) correlate with the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT; good convergent validity); and (2) differentiate between those self-reporting “some hand problems” versus “no hand problems” (good criterion validity). Design: Cross-sectional validation analyses. Setting: Rehabilitation research laboratory located within a hospital. Participants: People with multiple sclerosis self-reporting “some” (n=21; mean age, 52.52±10.69 y; females, n=16; disease duration, 18.81±10.38 y) versus “no” (n=21; age, 51.24±12.73 y; females, n=14; disease duration, 17.71±10.16 y) hand problems. Main Outcome Measures: We assessed hand function using the criterion standard 9HPT and robotic testing. Robotic outcomes included an overall task score, as well as 2 movement planning (ie, reaction time and initial direction angle) and 2 movement correction (ie, movement time and path length ratio) spatiotemporal values. We identified participants reporting “some” versus “no” hand problems via the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29. We analyzed our nonparametric data using a Mann–Whitney U test and Spearman rank-order correlation. Results: Those reporting “some hand problems” included more right-handed individuals (P=.038); otherwise, the 2 groups were characteristically similar. Visually guided reaching task score and movement planning but not movement correction spatiotemporal values demonstrated moderate correlations with 9HPT for both the dominant (reaction time: r=0.489, P=.001; initial direction angle: r=0.429, P=.005) and nondominant (reaction time: r=0.521, P<.001; initial direction angle: r=0.321, P=.038) side. Further, reaction time, but not 9HPT or any other robotic outcome, differentiated between the 2 groups (P=.036); those reporting “no hand problems” moved faster (ie, dominant side: 0.2810 [0.2605-0.3215] vs 0.3400 [0.2735-0.3725] s). Conclusions: Robotic test metrics demonstrated modest criterion and convergent validity in multiple sclerosis, with reaction time being the most compelling. When looking beyond the task score, spatiotemporal robotic measures may help discern subtle multiple sclerosis-related hand problems. Movement planning spatiotemporal values appear more meaningful than movement correction and could prove fruitful as the target for future intervention strategies.
format Article
id doaj-art-54d2e3c77a794be3979e2281fadff4de
institution OA Journals
issn 2590-1095
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation
spelling doaj-art-54d2e3c77a794be3979e2281fadff4de2025-08-20T01:55:46ZengElsevierArchives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation2590-10952024-12-016410038210.1016/j.arrct.2024.100382Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple SclerosisNick W. Bray, PhD0Syed Z. Raza, MSc1Joselyn Romero Avila, BME(c)2Caitlin J Newell, BSc, BA3Michelle Ploughman, PhD4Recovery and Performance Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada; Nick W Bray, PhD.Recovery and Performance Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, CanadaRecovery and Performance Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada; School of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, National University of San Marcos, Lima, PeruRecovery and Performance Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, CanadaRecovery and Performance Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada; Corresponding author Michelle Ploughman, PhD, Recovery and Performance Laboratory, Memorial University of Newfoundland St. John's, NL, Canada.Objective: To determine whether robotic metrics: (1) correlate with the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT; good convergent validity); and (2) differentiate between those self-reporting “some hand problems” versus “no hand problems” (good criterion validity). Design: Cross-sectional validation analyses. Setting: Rehabilitation research laboratory located within a hospital. Participants: People with multiple sclerosis self-reporting “some” (n=21; mean age, 52.52±10.69 y; females, n=16; disease duration, 18.81±10.38 y) versus “no” (n=21; age, 51.24±12.73 y; females, n=14; disease duration, 17.71±10.16 y) hand problems. Main Outcome Measures: We assessed hand function using the criterion standard 9HPT and robotic testing. Robotic outcomes included an overall task score, as well as 2 movement planning (ie, reaction time and initial direction angle) and 2 movement correction (ie, movement time and path length ratio) spatiotemporal values. We identified participants reporting “some” versus “no” hand problems via the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29. We analyzed our nonparametric data using a Mann–Whitney U test and Spearman rank-order correlation. Results: Those reporting “some hand problems” included more right-handed individuals (P=.038); otherwise, the 2 groups were characteristically similar. Visually guided reaching task score and movement planning but not movement correction spatiotemporal values demonstrated moderate correlations with 9HPT for both the dominant (reaction time: r=0.489, P=.001; initial direction angle: r=0.429, P=.005) and nondominant (reaction time: r=0.521, P<.001; initial direction angle: r=0.321, P=.038) side. Further, reaction time, but not 9HPT or any other robotic outcome, differentiated between the 2 groups (P=.036); those reporting “no hand problems” moved faster (ie, dominant side: 0.2810 [0.2605-0.3215] vs 0.3400 [0.2735-0.3725] s). Conclusions: Robotic test metrics demonstrated modest criterion and convergent validity in multiple sclerosis, with reaction time being the most compelling. When looking beyond the task score, spatiotemporal robotic measures may help discern subtle multiple sclerosis-related hand problems. Movement planning spatiotemporal values appear more meaningful than movement correction and could prove fruitful as the target for future intervention strategies.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109524000958Multiple sclerosisvalidationrehabilitationroboticsUpper-limbhand
spellingShingle Nick W. Bray, PhD
Syed Z. Raza, MSc
Joselyn Romero Avila, BME(c)
Caitlin J Newell, BSc, BA
Michelle Ploughman, PhD
Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple Sclerosis
Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation
Multiple sclerosis
validation
rehabilitation
robotics
Upper-limb
hand
title Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple Sclerosis
title_full Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple Sclerosis
title_fullStr Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple Sclerosis
title_full_unstemmed Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple Sclerosis
title_short Robotic Rigor: Validity of the Kinarm End-Point Robot Visually Guided Reaching Test in Multiple Sclerosis
title_sort robotic rigor validity of the kinarm end point robot visually guided reaching test in multiple sclerosis
topic Multiple sclerosis
validation
rehabilitation
robotics
Upper-limb
hand
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109524000958
work_keys_str_mv AT nickwbrayphd roboticrigorvalidityofthekinarmendpointrobotvisuallyguidedreachingtestinmultiplesclerosis
AT syedzrazamsc roboticrigorvalidityofthekinarmendpointrobotvisuallyguidedreachingtestinmultiplesclerosis
AT joselynromeroavilabmec roboticrigorvalidityofthekinarmendpointrobotvisuallyguidedreachingtestinmultiplesclerosis
AT caitlinjnewellbscba roboticrigorvalidityofthekinarmendpointrobotvisuallyguidedreachingtestinmultiplesclerosis
AT michelleploughmanphd roboticrigorvalidityofthekinarmendpointrobotvisuallyguidedreachingtestinmultiplesclerosis