Fine motor assessment in upper extremity using custom-made electronic pegboard test

K Aneesha Acharya, Somashekara Bha, M Kanthi, Bhamini Krishna Rao

DOI: 10.4103/jmss.JMSS_58_20

Abstract


A fine motor test involves the manipulation of smaller objects with fingers, hands, and wrists. This test is an integral part of the evaluation of an upper extremity function. Nine Hole Peg Test (NHPT) is one among such tests which assess the ability to manipulate pegs with the thumb and finger. There is a need to develop a fine motor assessment tool which is reproducible and mimics closely the natural movement of hands. The aim of this work is to develop an electronic pegboard which is easy to administer and efficient in terms of time. Pegboard device is modified and standardized by (1) Adding electronic circuits to custom-made pegboard and programmed using a microcontroller (ATmega2560), (2) Following a specific sequence in placing and picking the pegs from the board, and (3) Using Infrared sensor and robust algorithm to ensure one peg movement at a time. The setup is administered on 15 healthy participants (nine females, six males aged between 21 and 80) and the outcome is compared with the results of traditional NHPT. Predefined sequence in moving the pegs and electronic timer features provide reliable results for repeated measurements and facilitate storing test score in a digital repository. This data could be used as reference data during the follow-up visits. The maximum difference between the measured timing between the present setup and traditional NHPT is about 6.7%. It is important to note that, due to inherent delay (response time) in the traditional NHPT, when compared to present setup the measured timing is always on the higher side. Nondependency on the manual stopwatch to record the time and hands-free of any wearable device are the advantages of the present setup.

Keywords


Electronic pegboard, fine motor test, infrared sensor, microcontroller, Nine Hole Peg Test

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:394-424.

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin 2019;69:7-34.

American Cancer Society. Cancer Statistics Center. Available from: http://cancerstatisticscenter.cancer.org. [Last accessed on 2020 Feb 10].

Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Al-Hawary M, Asbun H, Bain A, Behrman SW, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, version 2.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2017;15:1028-61.

Vincent A, Herman J, Schulick R, Hruban RH, Goggins M. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet 2011;378:607-20.

Brennan DD, Zamboni GA, Raptopoulos VD, Kruskal JB. Comprehensive preoperative assessment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma with 64-section volumetric CT. Radiographics 2007;27:1653-66.

Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography – An increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-84.

Chaparian A, Zarchi HK. Assessment of radiation-induced cancer risk to patients undergoing computed tomography angiography scans. Int J Radiat Res 2018;16:107-15.

Mahmoodi M, Chaparian A. Organ doses, effective dose, and cancer risk from coronary CT angiography examinations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020;214:1131-6.

McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: Overview of available options. Radiographics 2006;26:503-12.

Jiang H. Computed Tomography: Principles, Design, Artifacts, and Recent Advances. Bellingham, Washington USA (Published by SPIE and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.): SPIE; 2009.

Prakash P, Kalra MK, Kambadakone AK, Pien H, Hsieh J, Blake MA, et al. Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 2010;45:202-10.

Beister M, Kolditz D, Kalender WA. Iterative reconstruction methods in X-ray CT. Phys Med 2012;28:94-108.

Leipsic J, Nguyen G, Brown J, Sin D, Mayo JR. A prospective evaluation of dose reduction and image quality in chest CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:1095-9.

Woisetschläger M, Henriksson L, Bartholomae W, Gasslander T, Björnsson B, Sandström P. Iterative reconstruction algorithm improves the image quality without affecting quantitative measurements of computed tomography perfusion in the upper abdomen. Eur J Radiol Open 2020;7:100243.

Mileto A, Guimaraes LS, McCollough CH, Fletcher JG, Yu L. State of the art in abdominal CT: The limits of iterative reconstruction algorithms. Radiology 2019;293:491-503.

Xie Q, Wu J, Tang Y, Dou Y, Hao S, Xu F, et al. Whole-organ CT perfusion of the pancreas: Impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality, perfusion parameters and radiation dose in 256-slice CT-preliminary findings. PLoS One 2013;8:e80468.

Yamamura S, Oda S, Utsunomiya D, Funama Y, Imuta M, Namimoto T, et al. Dynamic computed tomography of locally advanced pancreatic cancer: Effect of low tube voltage and a hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm on image quality. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2013;37:790-6.

Yasaka K, Katsura M, Akahane M, Sato J, Matsuda I, Ohtomo K. Model-based iterative reconstruction and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: Dose-reduced CT for detecting pancreatic calcification. Acta Radiol Open 2016;5:2058460116628340.

Choi JW, Lee JM, Yoon JH, Baek JH, Han JK, Choi BI. Iterative reconstruction algorithms of computed tomography for the assessment of small pancreatic lesions: Phantom study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2013;37:911-23.

Shuman WP, Chan KT, Busey JM, Mitsumori LM, Choi E, Koprowicz KM, et al. Standard and reduced radiation dose liver CT images: Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction versus model-based iterative reconstruction-comparison of findings and image quality. Radiology 2014;273:793-800.

Deak PD, Smal Y, Kalender WA. Multisection CT protocols: Sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology 2010;257:158-66.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

  https://e-rasaneh.ir/Certificate/22728

https://e-rasaneh.ir/

ISSN : 2228-7477