Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024
Assessing effectiveness of serious game training designed to assist in upper limb prosthesis rehabilitation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Maas Bart, Van Der Sluis Corry K, Bongers Raoul M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Controlling a myoelectric upper limb prosthesis is difficult, therefore training is required. Since training with serious games showed promising results, the current paper focuses on game design and its effectivity for transfer between in-game skill to actual prosthesis use for proportional control of hand opening and control of switching between grips. We also examined training duration and individual differences.
METHOD: Thirty-six participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a task-specific serious game training group, a non-task-specific serious game training group and a control group. Each group performed a pre-test, mid-test and a post-test with five training sessions between each test moment. Test sessions assessed proportional control using the Cylinder test, a test designed to measure scaling of hand aperture during grabbing actions, and the combined use of proportional and switch control using the Clothespin Relocation Test, part of the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure and Tray Test. Switch control was assessed during training by measuring amplitude difference and phasing of co-contraction triggers.
RESULTS: Differences between groups over test sessions were observed for proportional control tasks, however there was lack of structure in these findings. Maximum aperture changed with test moment and some participants adjusted maximum aperture for smaller objects. For proportional and switch control tasks no differences between groups were observed. The effect of test moment suggests a testing effect. For learning switch control, an overall improvement across groups was found in phasing of the co-contraction peaks. Importantly, individual differences were found in all analyses.
CONCLUSION: As improvements over test sessions were found, but no relevant differences between groups were revealed, we conclude that transfer effects from game training to actual prosthesis use did not take place. Task specificity nor training duration had effects on outcomes. Our results imply testing effects instead of transfer effects, in which individual differences played a significant role. How transfer from serious game training in upper limb prosthesis use can be enhanced, needs further attention.
METHOD: Thirty-six participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a task-specific serious game training group, a non-task-specific serious game training group and a control group. Each group performed a pre-test, mid-test and a post-test with five training sessions between each test moment. Test sessions assessed proportional control using the Cylinder test, a test designed to measure scaling of hand aperture during grabbing actions, and the combined use of proportional and switch control using the Clothespin Relocation Test, part of the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure and Tray Test. Switch control was assessed during training by measuring amplitude difference and phasing of co-contraction triggers.
RESULTS: Differences between groups over test sessions were observed for proportional control tasks, however there was lack of structure in these findings. Maximum aperture changed with test moment and some participants adjusted maximum aperture for smaller objects. For proportional and switch control tasks no differences between groups were observed. The effect of test moment suggests a testing effect. For learning switch control, an overall improvement across groups was found in phasing of the co-contraction peaks. Importantly, individual differences were found in all analyses.
CONCLUSION: As improvements over test sessions were found, but no relevant differences between groups were revealed, we conclude that transfer effects from game training to actual prosthesis use did not take place. Task specificity nor training duration had effects on outcomes. Our results imply testing effects instead of transfer effects, in which individual differences played a significant role. How transfer from serious game training in upper limb prosthesis use can be enhanced, needs further attention.