Monitoring motor capacity changes of children during rehabilitation using body-worn sensors
Christina Strohrmann, Rob Labruyère, Corinna N Gerber, Hubertus J van Hedel, Bert Arnrich, Gerhard Tröster, Christina Strohrmann, Rob Labruyère, Corinna N Gerber, Hubertus J van Hedel, Bert Arnrich, Gerhard Tröster
Abstract
Background: Rehabilitation services use outcome measures to track motor performance of their patients over time. State-of-the-art approaches use mainly patients' feedback and experts' observations for this purpose. We aim at continuously monitoring children in daily life and assessing normal activities to close the gap between movements done as instructed by caregivers and natural movements during daily life. To investigate the applicability of body-worn sensors for motor assessment in children, we investigated changes in movement capacity during defined motor tasks longitudinally.
Methods: We performed a longitudinal study over four weeks with 4 children (2 girls; 2 diagnosed with Cerebral Palsy and 2 with stroke, on average 10.5 years old) undergoing rehabilitation. Every week, the children performed 10 predefined motor tasks. Capacity in terms of quality and quantity was assessed by experts and movement was monitored using 10 ETH Orientation Sensors (ETHOS), a small and unobtrusive inertial measurement unit. Features such as smoothness of movement were calculated from the sensor data and a regression was used to estimate the capacity from the features and their relation to clinical data. Therefore, the target and features were normalized to range from 0 to 1.
Results: We achieved a mean RMS-error of 0.15 and a mean correlation value of 0.86 (p < 0.05 for all tasks) between our regression estimate of motor task capacity and experts' ratings across all tasks. We identified the most important features and were able to reduce the sensor setup from 10 to 3 sensors. We investigated features that provided a good estimate of the motor capacity independently of the task performed, e.g. smoothness of the movement.
Conclusions: We found that children's task capacity can be assessed from wearable sensors and that some of the calculated features provide a good estimate of movement capacity over different tasks. This indicates the potential of using the sensors in daily life, when little or no information on the task performed is available. For the assessment, the use of three sensors on both wrists and the hip suffices. With the developed algorithms, we plan to assess children's motor performance in daily life with a follow-up study.
Figures
References
- Law M, King G, Russell D, MacKinnon E, Hurley P, Murphy C. Measuring outcomes in children’s rehabilitation: a decision protocol. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(6):629–636. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90164-8.
- Majnemer A. Benefits of using outcome measures in pediatric rehabilitation. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2010;30(3):165–167. doi: 10.3109/01942638.2010.484353.
- Russell D, Avery L, Rosenbaum P, Raina P, Walter S, Palisano R. Improved scaling of the gross motor function measure for children with cerebral palsy: evidence of reliability and validity. Phys Ther. 2000;80(9):873–885.
- Haley S, Coster W, Faas R. A content validity study of the pediatric evaluation of disability inventory. Pediatr Phys Ther. 1991;3(4):177–184.
- Msall M, DiGaudio K, Rogers B, LaForest S, Catanzaro N, Campbell J, Wilczenski F, Duffy L. The functional independence measure for children (WeeFIM). Conceptual basis and pilot use in children with developmental disabilities. Clin Pediatr. 1994;33(7):421–430. doi: 10.1177/000992289403300708.
- Croce RV, Horvat M, McCarthy E. Reliability and concurrent validity of the movement assessment battery for children. Percept Motor Skills. 2001;93:275–280.
- Grieve D, Ruth J. The relationships between length of stride, step frequency, time of swing and speed of walking for children and adults. Ergonomics. 1966;9(5):379–399. doi: 10.1080/00140136608964399.
- Majnemer A, Limperopoulos C. Importance of outcome determination in pediatric rehabilitation. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002;44(11):773–777.
- Labruyère R, Agarwala A, Curt A. Rehabilitation in spine and spinal cord trauma. Spine. 2010;35(21S):S259.
- Tieman B, Palisano R, Gracely E, Rosenbaum P. Gross motor capability and performance of mobility in children with cerebral palsy: a comparison across home, school, and outdoors/community settings. Phys Ther. 2004;84(5):419–429.
- Harvey A, Baker R, Morris M, Hough J, Hughes M, Graham H. Does parent report measure performance? A study of the construct validity of the Functional Mobility Scale. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52(2):181–185. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03354.x.
- Holsbeeke L, Ketelaar M, Schoemaker M, Gorter J. Capacity, capability, and performance: different constructs or three of a kind? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(5):849–855. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.11.015.
- Bonato P. Advances in wearable technology and applications in physical medicine and rehabilitation. J NeuroEng Rehabil. 2005;2:2. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-2-2.
- Bonato P, Mork P, Sherrill D, Westgaard R. Data mining of motor patterns recorded with wearable technology. Eng Med Biol Mag, IEEE. 2003;22(3):110–119. doi: 10.1109/MEMB.2003.1213634.
- Patel S, Hughes R, Hester T, Stein J, Akay M, Dy J, Bonato P. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS. IEEE; 2010. Tracking motor recovery in stroke survivors undergoing rehabilitation using wearable technology; pp. 6858–6861.
- Patel S, Hughes R, Hester T, Stein J, Akay M, Dy J, Bonato P. A novel approach to monitor rehabilitation outcomes in stroke survivors using wearable technology. Proc IEEE. 2010;98:450–461.
- Hester T, Hughes R, Sherrill D, Knorr B, Akay M, Stein J, Bonato P. Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks, 2006. BSN 2006. International Workshop on. IEEE Computer Society; 2006:. Using wearable sensors to measure motor abilities following stroke. 4, pp. 5–8.
- Del Din S, Patel S, Cobelli C, Bonato P. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE. IEEE; 2011. Estimating fugl-meyer clinical scores in stroke survivors using wearable sensors; pp. 5839–5842.
- Wade E, Parnandi A, Mataric M. Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth) 2010 4th International Conference on. IEEE; 2010. Automated administration of the wolf motor function test for post-stroke assessment; pp. 1–7.
- Taub E, Miller N, Novack T, Cook 3rd E, Fleming W, Nepomuceno C, Connell J, Crago J. et al.Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74(4):347.
- Bento V, Cruz V, Ribeiro D, Cunha J. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society,EMBC, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE. IEEE; 2011. Towards a movement quantification system capable of automatic evaluation of upper limb motor function after neurological injury; pp. 5456–5460.
- Parnandi A, Wade E, Mataric M. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Annual International Conference on. IEEE; 2010. Motor function assessment using wearable inertial sensors; pp. 86–89.
- Zhang M, Lange B, Chang CY, Sawchuk AA, Rizzo AA. Beyond the standard clinical rating scales: fine-grained assessment of post-stroke motor functionality using wearable inertial sensors. International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) 2012.
- Nguyen K, Chen I, Luo Z, Yeo S, Duh H. A wearable sensing system for tracking and monitoring of functional arm movement. Mechatronics, IEEE/ASME Trans. 2011;16(2):213–220.
- Uswatte G, Foo W, Olmstead H, Lopez K, Holand A, Simms L. Ambulatory monitoring of arm movement using accelerometry: an objective measure of upper-extremity rehabilitation in persons with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(7):1498–1501. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.01.010.
- van der Pas S, Verbunt J, Breukelaar D, van Woerden R, Seelen H. Assessment of arm activity using triaxial accelerometry in patients with a stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(9):1437–1442. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.02.021.
- Aminian K, Rezakhanlou K, De Andres E, Fritsch C, Leyvraz P, Robert P. Temporal feature estimation during walking using miniature accelerometers: an analysis of gait improvement after hip arthroplasty. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1999;37(6):686–691. doi: 10.1007/BF02513368.
- Mackey AH, Walt SE, Stott NS. Deficits in Upper-Limb Task Performance in Children With Hemiplegic Cerebral Palsy as Defined by 3-Dimensional Kinematics. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:207–215. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.10.023.
- Harms H, Amft O, Tröster G, Appert M, Müller R, Meyer-Heim A. Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Ubiquitous computing. ACM; 2009. Wearable therapist: sensing garments for supporting children improve posture; pp. 85–88.
- Mancinelli C, Patel S, Deming L, Schmid M, Patritti B, Chu J, Beckwith J, Greenwald R, Healey J, Bonato P. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2009 EMBC 2009. Annual International Conference of the IEEE. IEEE; 2009. Assessing the feasibility of classifying toe-walking severity in children with cerebral palsy using a sensorized shoe; pp. 5163–5166.
- Abu-Faraj Z, Harris G, Abler J, Wertsch J. A Holter-type, microprocessor-based, rehabilitation instrument for acquisition and storage of plantar pressure data. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1997;34:187–194.
- Taylor N, Sand P, Jebsen R. Evaluation of hand function in children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1973;54(3):129.
- Kalsi-Ryan S, Curt A, Fehlings MG, Verrier MC. Assessment of the hand in tetraplegia using the Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensibility and Prehension (GRASSP) Topics Spinal Cord Injury Rehabil. 2009;14(4):34–46. doi: 10.1310/sci1404-34.
- Mathiowetz V, Kashman N, Volland G, Weber K, Dowe M, Rogers S. et al.Grip and pinch strength: normative data for adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1985;66(2):69.
- Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. et al.The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991;39(2):142.
- Harms H, Amft O, Winkler R, Schumm J, Kusserow M, Troester G. Sensors, 2010 IEEE. IEEE; 2010. ETHOS: Miniature orientation sensor for wearable human motion analysis; pp. 1037–1042.
- Strohrmann C, Harms H, Tröster G, Hensler S, Müller R. Proceedings of the 13th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp 2011) ACM; 2011. Out of the Lab and Into the Woods: Kinematic Analysis in Running Using Wearable Sensors; pp. 119–122.
- Strohrmann C, Harms H, Kappeler-Setz C, Tröster G. Monitoring kinematic changes with fatigue in running Using body-worn sensors. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomedicine. 2012;16(15):983–990.
- Bao L, Intille S. Activity recognition from user-annotated acceleration data. Pervasive Comput. 2004;3001:1–17. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-24646-6_1.
- Hogan N, Sternad D. Sensitivity of smoothness measures to movement duration, amplitude, and arrests. J Motor Behav. 2009;41(6):529–534. doi: 10.3200/35-09-004-RC.
- Kojima M, Obuchi S, Mizuno K, Henmi O, Ikeda N. Power spectrum entropy of acceleration time-series during movement as an indicator of smoothness of movement. J Physiol Anthropol. 2008;27(4):193–200. doi: 10.2114/jpa2.27.193.
- Keogh E, Chu S, Hart D, Pazzani M. Data Mining, 2001. ICDM 2001, Proceedings IEEE International Conference on. IEEE; 2001. An online algorithm for segmenting time series; pp. 289–296.
- Tura A, Raggi M, Rocchi L, Cutti A, Chiari L. Gait symmetry and regularity in transfemoral amputees assessed by trunk accelerations. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010;7(4)
- Bishop CM. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer; 2006.
Source: PubMed