Display options
Cite
Kato N, Tanaka T, Sugihara S, et al. A study of the effect of visual depth information on upper limb movement by use of measurement of smoothness. J Phys Ther Sci. 2016;28(4):1134-41doi: 10.1589/jpts.28.1134.
Kato, N., Tanaka, T., Sugihara, S., Shimizu, K., & Kudo, N. (2016). A study of the effect of visual depth information on upper limb movement by use of measurement of smoothness. Journal of physical therapy science, 28(4), 1134-41. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.28.1134
Kato, Norio, et al. "A study of the effect of visual depth information on upper limb movement by use of measurement of smoothness." Journal of physical therapy science vol. 28,4 (2016): 1134-41. doi: https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.28.1134
Kato N, Tanaka T, Sugihara S, Shimizu K, Kudo N. A study of the effect of visual depth information on upper limb movement by use of measurement of smoothness. J Phys Ther Sci. 2016 Apr;28(4):1134-41. doi: 10.1589/jpts.28.1134. Epub 2016 Apr 28. PMID: 27190441; PMCID: PMC4868201.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Phys Ther Sci. 2016 Apr;28(4):1134-41. doi: 10.1589/jpts.28.1134. Epub 2016 Apr 28.

A study of the effect of visual depth information on upper limb movement by use of measurement of smoothness.

Journal of physical therapy science

Norio Kato, Toshiaki Tanaka, Syunichi Sugihara, Koichi Shimizu, Nobuki Kudo

Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hokkaido University of Scienc, Japan; Graduate School of Information Science and Technology, Hokkaido University, Japan.
  2. Institute of Gerontology, The University of Tokyo, Japan; Sapporo Syuyukai Hospital, Japan.
  3. Institute of Gerontology, The University of Tokyo, Japan.

PMID: 27190441 PMCID: PMC4868201 DOI: 10.1589/jpts.28.1134

Abstract

[Purpose] This study verified that the smoothness of reaching movements is able to quantitatively evaluate the effects of two- and three-dimensional images on movement in healthy people. In addition, clinical data of cerebrovascular accident patients were also analyzed by the same method. [Subjects] Ten healthy adult volunteers and two male patients with previous cerebrovascular accidents participated. [Methods] The subjects were tasked with reaching for objects shown on a display. The target and virtual limb, rendered with computer graphics, were shown on the display. Movements of the virtual limb were synchronized with those of the subject. Healthy subjects reached for targets with their dominant arm, and cerebrovascular accident patients used their paretic arm. A polarized display and polarized glasses were used when the subjects were shown three-dimensional images. In the present study, jerk cost was used to quantify the smoothness of movement. [Results] Six of the 10 healthy subjects had significantly smoother reaching movements when viewing the three-dimensional images. The two cerebrovascular accident patients tended to have smoother movements in response to the three-dimensional images. [Conclusion] Analysis of the smoothness of movement was able to detect the influence of the depth cue in vision on movement quantitatively for the healthy subjects and cerebrovascular accident patients.

Keywords: 3D images; Smoothness; Virtual reality

References

  1. Behav Res Methods. 2014 Sep;46(3):634-40 - PubMed
  2. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Mar 06;11:32 - PubMed
  3. Stroke. 2010 Jul;41(7):1477-84 - PubMed
  4. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2012 Sep;48(3):523-30 - PubMed
  5. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Oct;27(10):3185-90 - PubMed
  6. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Apr;27(4):1157-9 - PubMed
  7. J Rehabil Med. 2003 May;35(3):127-31 - PubMed
  8. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2004 Dec 14;1(1):11 - PubMed
  9. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2013 Sep;21(5):849-59 - PubMed
  10. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Aug;95(8):1484-9 - PubMed
  11. J Neurosci. 2002 Sep 15;22(18):8297-304 - PubMed
  12. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Jun;27(6):1637-40 - PubMed
  13. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Jun;27(6):1883-8 - PubMed
  14. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007 Mar-Apr;14 (2):52-61 - PubMed
  15. J Mot Behav. 1997 Jun;29(2):147-58 - PubMed
  16. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Mar;27(3):655-8 - PubMed
  17. Hum Factors. 2002 Spring;44(1):144-55 - PubMed
  18. Hum Mov Sci. 2013 Jun;32(3):511-26 - PubMed
  19. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999 Jun;80(6):624-8 - PubMed
  20. Int J Rehabil Res. 2013 Jun;36(2):162-71 - PubMed
  21. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Nov;86(11):2218-23 - PubMed
  22. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Feb;85(2):268-73 - PubMed
  23. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2002 Winter;8(4):11-23 - PubMed
  24. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2013 Sep 28;10 :102 - PubMed
  25. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2011 Oct 31;8:61 - PubMed
  26. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2007 Jun 22;4:20 - PubMed
  27. Stroke. 2005 Jul;36(7):1480-4 - PubMed
  28. Stroke. 2003 Sep;34(9):2181-6 - PubMed
  29. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Jul;27(7):2057-60 - PubMed
  30. Clin Rehabil. 2002 Feb;16(1):55-60 - PubMed
  31. J Phys Ther Sci. 2013 May;25(5):575-80 - PubMed
  32. Lancet Neurol. 2009 Aug;8(8):741-54 - PubMed
  33. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2007;25(5-6):453-60 - PubMed
  34. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Mar;96(3):418-425.e2 - PubMed
  35. Exp Brain Res. 2013 Nov;231(3):277-91 - PubMed
  36. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Feb;85(2):274-8 - PubMed
  37. Disabil Rehabil. 1999 Aug;21(8):357-64 - PubMed
  38. Stroke. 2011 May;42(5):1380-6 - PubMed
  39. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Jul;27(7):2285-7 - PubMed
  40. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013 Jan;27(1):13-23 - PubMed

Publication Types