These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Capacity Assessment of Prosthetic Performance for the Upper Limb (CAPPFUL): Characterization of Normative Kinematics and Performance.
    Author: Boyle A, Prejean B, Ruhde L, Pool K, Bollinger C, Miguelez J, Conyers D, Ryan T, Kontson KL.
    Journal: PM R; 2020 Sep; 12(9):870-881. PubMed ID: 31788979.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Evaluation of maladaptive compensatory movement is important to objectively identify the impact of prosthetic rehabilitative intervention on body mechanics. The Capacity Assessment of Prosthetic Performance for the Upper Limb (CAPPFUL) scores this type of compensation by comparing movements of the prosthesis user to movements of individuals with intact, sound upper limbs (ULs). However, expected movements of individuals with sound, intact ULs have not been studied for the set of tasks performed in the CAPPFUL. OBJECTIVE: To enhance the scoring approach for the maladaptive compensatory movement domain of the CAPPFUL by defining normative kinematic movement and characterizing variability and repeatability. DESIGN: Clinical measurement. SETTING: Laboratories at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and University of Texas-Arlington. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 20 participants with no upper limb (UL) disability or impairment. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Kinematic trajectories, range of motion, maximum angle, and completion time were calculated. Repeatability and intersubject variability were assessed by calculating Pearson's correlation coefficient (R), adjusted coefficient of multiple correlation (CMCadj), and max SD (SDmax) for nine joint angles at the elbow, shoulder, neck, and torso. RESULTS: For most joints evaluated, repeatability was lower (R < 0.8) for CAPPFUL 3-Zip vest, CAPPFUL 7-Cut w/ knife, and CAPPFUL 8-Squeeze water, implying inconsistent approaches within a subject from trial to trial for a given task. For most tasks, the joint angle SDmax across all participants was <20°. The approach for completing CAPPFUL 1 - Weights in crate and CAPPFUL 4 - Pick up dice was generally similar across participants (CMCadj >0.4). For other tasks, however, different approaches across participants at the torso and shoulder joint can be seen. CONCLUSION(S): This work established the expected movements of individuals with sound, intact ULs for tasks performed in the CAPPFUL that can be used to inform consistent, standardized scoring of the maladaptive compensatory movement domain.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]