Measures of accuracy for active shoulder movements at 3 different speeds with kinesthetic and visual feedback
Repeated-measures experiment. To compare measures of end point accuracy (EPA) for 2 feedback conditions: (1) visual and kinesthetic feedback and (2) kinesthetic feedback alone, during shoulder movements, at 3 different speeds. Shoulder joint kinesthesia is typically reported with EPA measures, such...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy 2004-08, Vol.34 (8), p.468-478 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 478 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8 |
| container_start_page | 468 |
| container_title | The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy |
| container_volume | 34 |
| creator | Brindle, Timothy J Nitz, Arthur J Uhl, Tim L Kifer, Edward Shapiro, Robert |
| description | Repeated-measures experiment.
To compare measures of end point accuracy (EPA) for 2 feedback conditions: (1) visual and kinesthetic feedback and (2) kinesthetic feedback alone, during shoulder movements, at 3 different speeds.
Shoulder joint kinesthesia is typically reported with EPA measures, such as constant error. Reporting multiple measures of EPA, such as variable error and absolute error, could provide a more detailed description of performance.
Subjects were seated with the shoulder abducted 90 degrees in the scapular plane and externally rotated 75 degrees, with the forearm placed in a custom shoulder wheel. Subjects internally rotated the shoulder 27 degrees to a target position at 48 degrees of shoulder external rotation for both conditions. Motion analysis was used to determine peak angular velocity and 3 EPA measures for shoulder movements. Each EPA measure was compared between the 2 feedback conditions and among the 3 speeds with a separate 2-way analysis of variance.
Movements performed with kinesthetic feedback alone, measured by constant error (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.2519/jospt.2004.34.8.468 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66886630</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>66886630</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-f6c5c564b1053630f8d8880dd37c1b55f5ec16393ac365182c2f772bda38c4c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1LxDAQxYMoun78BYLk5K016SRpehTxC1a8eA9pMmGr7XZN2hX_e6MueHQuw4P3HsP8CDnnrKwkb65ex7SZyooxUYIodSmU3iML3oAuOAixTxaMN6xQjPMjcpzSK8sjmDgkR1xCDYyzBRme0KY5YqJjoNa5OVr3ScMYs5i6LdK0GufeY6TDuMUB11OidqJAfRcCxqxp2iD6RD-6aUXfujWmaYVT56hde7rt0mx7GrKjte7tlBwE2yc82-0T8nJ3-3LzUCyf7x9vrpeFA6imIignnVSi5UyCAha011oz76F2vJUySHRcQQPWgZJcV64KdV213oJ2wsEJufyt3cTxfc4HmaFLDvvernGck1FKa5V7_zXyGqCWuslG-DW6OKYUMZhN7AYbPw1n5puG-aFhvmkYEEabTCOnLnb1czug_8vs3g9fbAaITQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>17337589</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Measures of accuracy for active shoulder movements at 3 different speeds with kinesthetic and visual feedback</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Brindle, Timothy J ; Nitz, Arthur J ; Uhl, Tim L ; Kifer, Edward ; Shapiro, Robert</creator><creatorcontrib>Brindle, Timothy J ; Nitz, Arthur J ; Uhl, Tim L ; Kifer, Edward ; Shapiro, Robert</creatorcontrib><description>Repeated-measures experiment.
To compare measures of end point accuracy (EPA) for 2 feedback conditions: (1) visual and kinesthetic feedback and (2) kinesthetic feedback alone, during shoulder movements, at 3 different speeds.
Shoulder joint kinesthesia is typically reported with EPA measures, such as constant error. Reporting multiple measures of EPA, such as variable error and absolute error, could provide a more detailed description of performance.
Subjects were seated with the shoulder abducted 90 degrees in the scapular plane and externally rotated 75 degrees, with the forearm placed in a custom shoulder wheel. Subjects internally rotated the shoulder 27 degrees to a target position at 48 degrees of shoulder external rotation for both conditions. Motion analysis was used to determine peak angular velocity and 3 EPA measures for shoulder movements. Each EPA measure was compared between the 2 feedback conditions and among the 3 speeds with a separate 2-way analysis of variance.
Movements performed with kinesthetic feedback alone, measured by constant error (P<.01), variable error (P<.01), and absolute error (P<.01), were less accurate than movements performed with visual and kinesthetic feedback. Faster movements were less accurate when measured by constant error (P = .01) and absolute error (P<.01) than slower movements. Subjects tended to overshoot the target in the absence of visual feedback; however, movement speed played minimal role in the overshooting.
Multiple measures of EPA, such as constant, variable, and absolute error during simple restricted shoulder movements may provide additional information regarding the evaluation of a motor performance or identify different central nervous system control mechanisms for joint kinesthesia.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0190-6011</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-1344</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2004.34.8.468</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15373010</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Adult ; Feedback, Psychological - physiology ; Female ; Humans ; Kinesthesis - physiology ; Male ; Physical Therapy Modalities ; Psychomotor Performance ; Reproducibility of Results ; Shoulder - physiology ; Visual Perception</subject><ispartof>The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy, 2004-08, Vol.34 (8), p.468-478</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-f6c5c564b1053630f8d8880dd37c1b55f5ec16393ac365182c2f772bda38c4c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-f6c5c564b1053630f8d8880dd37c1b55f5ec16393ac365182c2f772bda38c4c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15373010$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Brindle, Timothy J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nitz, Arthur J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uhl, Tim L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kifer, Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shapiro, Robert</creatorcontrib><title>Measures of accuracy for active shoulder movements at 3 different speeds with kinesthetic and visual feedback</title><title>The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy</title><addtitle>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther</addtitle><description>Repeated-measures experiment.
To compare measures of end point accuracy (EPA) for 2 feedback conditions: (1) visual and kinesthetic feedback and (2) kinesthetic feedback alone, during shoulder movements, at 3 different speeds.
Shoulder joint kinesthesia is typically reported with EPA measures, such as constant error. Reporting multiple measures of EPA, such as variable error and absolute error, could provide a more detailed description of performance.
Subjects were seated with the shoulder abducted 90 degrees in the scapular plane and externally rotated 75 degrees, with the forearm placed in a custom shoulder wheel. Subjects internally rotated the shoulder 27 degrees to a target position at 48 degrees of shoulder external rotation for both conditions. Motion analysis was used to determine peak angular velocity and 3 EPA measures for shoulder movements. Each EPA measure was compared between the 2 feedback conditions and among the 3 speeds with a separate 2-way analysis of variance.
Movements performed with kinesthetic feedback alone, measured by constant error (P<.01), variable error (P<.01), and absolute error (P<.01), were less accurate than movements performed with visual and kinesthetic feedback. Faster movements were less accurate when measured by constant error (P = .01) and absolute error (P<.01) than slower movements. Subjects tended to overshoot the target in the absence of visual feedback; however, movement speed played minimal role in the overshooting.
Multiple measures of EPA, such as constant, variable, and absolute error during simple restricted shoulder movements may provide additional information regarding the evaluation of a motor performance or identify different central nervous system control mechanisms for joint kinesthesia.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Feedback, Psychological - physiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Kinesthesis - physiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Physical Therapy Modalities</subject><subject>Psychomotor Performance</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Shoulder - physiology</subject><subject>Visual Perception</subject><issn>0190-6011</issn><issn>1938-1344</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1LxDAQxYMoun78BYLk5K016SRpehTxC1a8eA9pMmGr7XZN2hX_e6MueHQuw4P3HsP8CDnnrKwkb65ex7SZyooxUYIodSmU3iML3oAuOAixTxaMN6xQjPMjcpzSK8sjmDgkR1xCDYyzBRme0KY5YqJjoNa5OVr3ScMYs5i6LdK0GufeY6TDuMUB11OidqJAfRcCxqxp2iD6RD-6aUXfujWmaYVT56hde7rt0mx7GrKjte7tlBwE2yc82-0T8nJ3-3LzUCyf7x9vrpeFA6imIignnVSi5UyCAha011oz76F2vJUySHRcQQPWgZJcV64KdV213oJ2wsEJufyt3cTxfc4HmaFLDvvernGck1FKa5V7_zXyGqCWuslG-DW6OKYUMZhN7AYbPw1n5puG-aFhvmkYEEabTCOnLnb1czug_8vs3g9fbAaITQ</recordid><startdate>20040801</startdate><enddate>20040801</enddate><creator>Brindle, Timothy J</creator><creator>Nitz, Arthur J</creator><creator>Uhl, Tim L</creator><creator>Kifer, Edward</creator><creator>Shapiro, Robert</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040801</creationdate><title>Measures of accuracy for active shoulder movements at 3 different speeds with kinesthetic and visual feedback</title><author>Brindle, Timothy J ; Nitz, Arthur J ; Uhl, Tim L ; Kifer, Edward ; Shapiro, Robert</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-f6c5c564b1053630f8d8880dd37c1b55f5ec16393ac365182c2f772bda38c4c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Feedback, Psychological - physiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Kinesthesis - physiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Physical Therapy Modalities</topic><topic>Psychomotor Performance</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Shoulder - physiology</topic><topic>Visual Perception</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Brindle, Timothy J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nitz, Arthur J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uhl, Tim L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kifer, Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shapiro, Robert</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Brindle, Timothy J</au><au>Nitz, Arthur J</au><au>Uhl, Tim L</au><au>Kifer, Edward</au><au>Shapiro, Robert</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Measures of accuracy for active shoulder movements at 3 different speeds with kinesthetic and visual feedback</atitle><jtitle>The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy</jtitle><addtitle>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther</addtitle><date>2004-08-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>468</spage><epage>478</epage><pages>468-478</pages><issn>0190-6011</issn><eissn>1938-1344</eissn><abstract>Repeated-measures experiment.
To compare measures of end point accuracy (EPA) for 2 feedback conditions: (1) visual and kinesthetic feedback and (2) kinesthetic feedback alone, during shoulder movements, at 3 different speeds.
Shoulder joint kinesthesia is typically reported with EPA measures, such as constant error. Reporting multiple measures of EPA, such as variable error and absolute error, could provide a more detailed description of performance.
Subjects were seated with the shoulder abducted 90 degrees in the scapular plane and externally rotated 75 degrees, with the forearm placed in a custom shoulder wheel. Subjects internally rotated the shoulder 27 degrees to a target position at 48 degrees of shoulder external rotation for both conditions. Motion analysis was used to determine peak angular velocity and 3 EPA measures for shoulder movements. Each EPA measure was compared between the 2 feedback conditions and among the 3 speeds with a separate 2-way analysis of variance.
Movements performed with kinesthetic feedback alone, measured by constant error (P<.01), variable error (P<.01), and absolute error (P<.01), were less accurate than movements performed with visual and kinesthetic feedback. Faster movements were less accurate when measured by constant error (P = .01) and absolute error (P<.01) than slower movements. Subjects tended to overshoot the target in the absence of visual feedback; however, movement speed played minimal role in the overshooting.
Multiple measures of EPA, such as constant, variable, and absolute error during simple restricted shoulder movements may provide additional information regarding the evaluation of a motor performance or identify different central nervous system control mechanisms for joint kinesthesia.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>15373010</pmid><doi>10.2519/jospt.2004.34.8.468</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0190-6011 |
| ispartof | The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy, 2004-08, Vol.34 (8), p.468-478 |
| issn | 0190-6011 1938-1344 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66886630 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
| subjects | Adult Feedback, Psychological - physiology Female Humans Kinesthesis - physiology Male Physical Therapy Modalities Psychomotor Performance Reproducibility of Results Shoulder - physiology Visual Perception |
| title | Measures of accuracy for active shoulder movements at 3 different speeds with kinesthetic and visual feedback |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T08%3A12%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measures%20of%20accuracy%20for%20active%20shoulder%20movements%20at%203%20different%20speeds%20with%20kinesthetic%20and%20visual%20feedback&rft.jtitle=The%20journal%20of%20orthopaedic%20and%20sports%20physical%20therapy&rft.au=Brindle,%20Timothy%20J&rft.date=2004-08-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=468&rft.epage=478&rft.pages=468-478&rft.issn=0190-6011&rft.eissn=1938-1344&rft_id=info:doi/10.2519/jospt.2004.34.8.468&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66886630%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=17337589&rft_id=info:pmid/15373010&rfr_iscdi=true |