SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Statistical Analysis and Kinematic Assessment of Upper Limb Reaching Task in Parkinson's Disease.

Sensors (Basel) · 2022-02-22

DOI: 10.3390/s22051708PMID: 35270853

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The impact of neurodegenerative disorders is twofold; they affect both quality of life and healthcare expenditure. In the case of Parkinson's disease, several strategies have been attempted to support the pharmacological treatment with rehabilitation protocols aimed at restoring motor function. In this scenario, the study of upper limb control mechanisms is particularly relevant due to the complexity of the joints involved in the movement of the arm. For these reasons, it is difficult to define proper indicators of the rehabilitation outcome. In this work, we propose a methodology to analyze and extract an ensemble of kinematic parameters from signals acquired during a complex upper limb reaching task. The methodology is tested in both healthy subjects and Parkinson's disease patients (N = 12), and a statistical analysis is carried out to establish the value of the extracted kinematic features in distinguishing between the two groups under study. The parameters with the greatest number of significances across the submovements are duration, mean velocity, maximum velocity, maximum acceleration, and smoothness. Results allowed the identification of a subset of significant kinematic parameters that could serve as a proof-of-concept for a future definition of potential indicators of the rehabilitation outcome in Parkinson's disease.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.