Three-dimensional motion analysis of dominant and nondominant hands under weight-bearing conditions in health elderly people

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2015.42.010

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Differences exist between the action execution of the dominant hand and the nondominant hand during daily lives. With the increasing of the age, the dominant hand and the nondominant hand play an equally important role in the action execution and implementation during daily lives. Previous studies mainly focus on the muscle strength of upper limbs. However, studies on the influence of joint dynamic characteristics and trajectory deviation on the occupational activities have been increased gradually. The three-dimension motion capture and analysis have become the reliable and valid standard of the assessment of the upper limb movement.

OBJECTIVE:By using the three-dimensional kinematic analyze method, to collect the data of the healthy elderly people using the upper limbs to drink water respectively with the cups of different weights and to investigate whether there is a difference between dominant and nondominant hands under different weight-bearing conditions based on upper limb kinematics

METHODS: Sixteen right-handed elder people were chosen to be the experimental subjects. The upper limb motion of drinking water with different weight was captured by Vicon Nexus. By Data modeling and trajectory filtering with pipeline and data normalizing with the Matlab, the three-dimensional angle and peak value of the velocity of the should, elbow and wrist joint in the bilateral upper limbs were analyzed and compared when lifting the cups of 100, 200 and 500 g.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The most significant difference could be found in the three-dimensional movement angle of the elbow joint when holding the weights: there were significant differences in 100 g horizontal plane (X axis) and sagittal plane (Z axis), 200 g frontal plane (Y axis) and sagittal plane (Z axis), and 500 g three-dimensional plane (P < 0.05). Difference could be found in the peak value of three-dimension angular velocity in the shoulder, elbow and wrist joints: 100 g (shoulder joint P_x=0.01; elbow joint P_y=0.048, P_z=0.007), 200 g (elbow joint P_y=0.033, P_z=0.005; wrist joint P_y=0.035), 500 g (elbow joint P_y=0.027, P_z=0.006) had significant differences (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the movement angle and angular velocity when holding different weights with the ipsilateral upper limb (P > 0.05). These results show that there is a difference in the movement angle and angular velocity between the dominant hand and the nondominant hand when drinking water. A great change of movement angle could be found in the X axis of the elbow joint in the dominant hand, and a great change of the movement angle could be found in the Z axis of the elbow joint in the nondominant hand. The angluar velocity in the Y axis has better changes than in the Z axis. The size of the weights has no effect on the movement of bilateral upper limbs.
中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：组织构建；骨细胞；软骨细胞；细胞培养；成纤维细胞；血管内皮细胞；骨质疏松；组织工程

Key words: 组织构建, 组织工程, 中老年人, 三维运动分析, 利手, 负重, 饮水, 运动范围, 角速度, 国家自然科学基金

Mao Yu-rong, Chen Na, Chen Pei-ming, Chen Song-bin, Li Li-fang, Huang Dong-feng. Three-dimensional motion analysis of dominant and nondominant hands under weight-bearing conditions in health elderly people[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2015, 19(42): 6776-6781.

Figures/Tables 3

References

[1] Annett J, Annett M, Hudson PT, Turner A,et al. The control of movement in the preferred and non-preferred hands. Q J Exp Psychol. 1979;31(Pt 4):641-52.
[2] Bagesteiro LB, Sainburg RL. Handedness: dominant arm advantages in control of limb dynamics. J Neurophysiol. 2002; 88(5):2408-21.
[3] Coley B, Jolles BM, Farron A, et al. Estimating dominant upper-limb segments during daily activity. Gait Posture. 2008; 27(3): 368-375.
[4] Chew JZ, Gandevia SC, Fitzpatrick RC. Postural control at the human wrist. J Physiol. 2008;586(5):1265-1275.
[5] Sainburg RL, Kalakanis D. Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching. J Neurophysiol. 2000;83(5):2661-2675.
[6] de Niet M, Bussmann JB, Ribbers GM, et al. The stroke upper-limb activity monitor: Its sensitivity to measure hemiplegic upper-limb activity during daily life. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007; 88(9):1121-1126.
[7] Vega-Gonzalez A, Granat MH. Continuous monitoring of upper-limb activity in a free-living environment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(3):541-548.
[8] Mozaz MJ, Crucian GP, Heilman KM. Age-related changes in arm-hand postural knowledge. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2009; 26(8): 675-684.
[9] Kalisch T, Wilimzig C, Kleibel N, et al. Age-related attenuation of dominant hand superiority. PloS One. 2006;1:e90.
[10] Kilbreath SL, Heard RC. Frequency of hand use in healthy older persons. Aust J Physiother. 2005;51(2):119-122.
[11] Taub E, Uswatte G. Constraint-induced movement therapy: bridging from the primate laboratory to the stroke rehabilitation laboratory.J Rehabil Med.2003;(41 Suppl): 34-40.
[12] Butler EE, Ladd AL, Louie SA, et al. Three-dimensional kinematics of the upper limb during a Reach and Grasp Cycle for children. Gait Posture. 2010;32(1):72-77.
[13] McGinley JL, Baker R, Wolfe R,et al. The reliability of three–dimensional kinematic gait measurements: a systematic review. Gait Posture. 2009; 29(3):360-369.
[14] Manca M, Leardini A, Cavazza S, et al. Repeatability of a new protocol for gait analysis in adult subjects. Gait Posture. 2010; 32(2):282-284.
[15] van Andel CJ, Wolterbeek N, Doorenbosch CA, et al. Complete 3D kinematics of upper extremity functional tasks. Gait Posture.2008;27(1):120-127.
[16] Petuskey K, Bagley A, Abdala E, et al. Upper extremity kinematics during functional activities: Three-dimensional studies in a normal pediatric population. Gait Posture. 2007; 25(4):573-579.
[17] Butler EE，Rose J. The Pediatric Upper Limb Motion Index and a temporal-spatial logistic regression: Quantitative analysis of upper limb movement disorders during the Reach & Grasp Cycle. J Biomech. 2012;45(6):945-951.
[18] Chen W, Xiong C, Huang X, et al. Kinematic analysis and dexterity evaluation of upper extremity in activities of daily living. Gait Posture. 2010;32(4): 475-481.
[19] Aizawa J，Masuda T,Koyama T, et al. Three-dimensional motion of the upper extremity joints during various activities of daily living. J Biomech. 2010;43(15):2915-2922.
[20] Mackey AH, Walt SE, Lobb GA, et al. Reliability of upper and lower limb three-dimensional kinematics in children with hemiplegia. Gait Posture. 2005;22(1):1-9.
[21] de los Reyes-Guzmán A, Dimbwadyo-Terrer I, Trincado- Alonso F, et al. Quantitative assessment based on kinematic measures of functional impairments during upper extremity movements: A review. Clin Biomech. 2014;29(7):719-727.
[22] Molina Rueda F, Rivas Montero FM, Pérez de Heredia Torres M, et al. Movement analysis of upper extremity hemiparesis in patients with cerebrovascular disease: a pilot study. Neurologia. 2012;27(6):343-347.
[23] Slavens BA, Harris GF. The biomechanics of upper extremity kinematic and kinetic modeling: applications to rehabilitation engineering. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 2008;36(2-3):93-125.
[24] Magermans DJ, Chadwick EK, Veeger HE, van der Helm FC. Requirements for upper extremity motions during activities of daily living. Clin Biomech. 2005;20(6):591-599.
[25] Van Hoof T, Vangestel C, Shacklock M, et al. Asymmetry of the ULNT1 elbow extension range-of-motion in a healthy population: consequences for clinical practice and research. Phys Ther Sport. 2012;13(3):141-149.
[26] Cooper JE, Shwedyk E, Quanbury AO, et al. Elbow joint restriction: effect on functional upper limb motion during performance of three feeding activities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993; 74(8):805-809.
[27] Werner FW, An KN. Biomechanics of the elbow and forearm. Hand Clin.. 1994:10(3):357-373.
[28] Earles DR, Judge JO, Gunnarsson OT. Velocity training induces power-specific adaptations in highly functioning older adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82(7):872-878.
[29] Henwood TR, Taaffe DR. Improved physical performance in older adults undertaking a short-term programme of high-velocity resistance training. Gerontology. 2005; 51: 108-115.
[30] Bottaro M, Machado SN, Noqueira W, et al. Effect of high versus low-velocity resistance training on muscular fitness and functional performance in older men. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2007;99(3):257-264.
[31] Sainburg RL. Evidence for a dynamic-dominance hypothesis of handedness. Exp Brain Res. 2002;142(2):241-258.
[32] Katz RT, Rymer WZ. Spastic hypertonia: mechanisms and measurement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70(2):144-55.
[33] Gottlieb GL, Song Q, Hong DA, et al. Coordinating two degrees of freedom during human arm movement: load and speed invariance of relative joint torques. J Neurophysiol. 1996;76(5):3196-206.
[34] Kee D, Na S, Chung MK. Effect of external load at varying hand positions on perceived discomfort. Int J Occup Saf Erqon. 2013;19(3):397-408.
[35] Glenn JM, Gray M, Binns A. The effects of loaded and unloaded high-velocity resistance training on functional fitness among community-dwelling older adults. Age Ageing. 2015;7(11):1-6.