Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Inter-rater reliability of kinesthetic measurements with the KINARM robotic exoskeleton

Authors: Jennifer A. Semrau, Troy M. Herter, Stephen H. Scott, Sean P. Dukelow

Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Kinesthesia (sense of limb movement) has been extremely difficult to measure objectively, especially in individuals who have survived a stroke. The development of valid and reliable measurements for proprioception is important to developing a better understanding of proprioceptive impairments after stroke and their impact on the ability to perform daily activities. We recently developed a robotic task to evaluate kinesthetic deficits after stroke and found that the majority (~60%) of stroke survivors exhibit significant deficits in kinesthesia within the first 10 days post-stroke. Here we aim to determine the inter-rater reliability of this robotic kinesthetic matching task.

Methods

Twenty-five neurologically intact control subjects and 15 individuals with first-time stroke were evaluated on a robotic kinesthetic matching task (KIN). Subjects sat in a robotic exoskeleton with their arms supported against gravity. In the KIN task, the robot moved the subjects’ stroke-affected arm at a preset speed, direction and distance. As soon as subjects felt the robot begin to move their affected arm, they matched the robot movement with the unaffected arm. Subjects were tested in two sessions on the KIN task: initial session and then a second session (within an average of 18.2 ± 13.8 h of the initial session for stroke subjects), which were supervised by different technicians. The task was performed both with and without the use of vision in both sessions. We evaluated intra-class correlations of spatial and temporal parameters derived from the KIN task to determine the reliability of the robotic task.

Results

We evaluated 8 spatial and temporal parameters that quantify kinesthetic behavior. We found that the parameters exhibited moderate to high intra-class correlations between the initial and retest conditions (Range, r-value = [0.53–0.97]).

Conclusions

The robotic KIN task exhibited good inter-rater reliability. This validates the KIN task as a reliable, objective method for quantifying kinesthesia after stroke.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Sherrington C. On the proprio-ceptive system, especially in its reflex aspect. Brain. 1907;29(4):467–82. Sherrington C. On the proprio-ceptive system, especially in its reflex aspect. Brain. 1907;29(4):467–82.
2.
go back to reference Connell LA, Lincoln NB, Radford KA. Somatosensory impairment after stroke : frequency of different deficits and their recovery. Clin Rehabil. 2008;22:758–67.CrossRefPubMed Connell LA, Lincoln NB, Radford KA. Somatosensory impairment after stroke : frequency of different deficits and their recovery. Clin Rehabil. 2008;22:758–67.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Dukelow SP, Herter TM, Moore KD, Demers MJ, Glasgow JI, Bagg SD, et al. Quantitative assessment of limb position sense following stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(2):178–87.CrossRefPubMed Dukelow SP, Herter TM, Moore KD, Demers MJ, Glasgow JI, Bagg SD, et al. Quantitative assessment of limb position sense following stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(2):178–87.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Semrau JA, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Robotic identification of kinesthetic deficits after stroke. Stroke. 2013;44:3414–21.CrossRefPubMed Semrau JA, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Robotic identification of kinesthetic deficits after stroke. Stroke. 2013;44:3414–21.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Semrau JA, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Examining differences in patterns of sensory and motor recovery after stroke with robotics. Stroke. 2015;46:3459–69.CrossRefPubMed Semrau JA, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Examining differences in patterns of sensory and motor recovery after stroke with robotics. Stroke. 2015;46:3459–69.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Carey L. Somatosensory loss after stroke. Crit Rev Phys Rehabil. 1995;13:51–91.CrossRef Carey L. Somatosensory loss after stroke. Crit Rev Phys Rehabil. 1995;13:51–91.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Rand D, (Tamar) Weiss PL, Gottlieb D. Does Proprioceptive Loss Influence Recovery of the Upper Extremity After Stroke? Neurorehabil. Neural Repair. 1999;13:15–21. Rand D, (Tamar) Weiss PL, Gottlieb D. Does Proprioceptive Loss Influence Recovery of the Upper Extremity After Stroke? Neurorehabil. Neural Repair. 1999;13:15–21.
8.
go back to reference Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Somatosensory recovery: a longitudinal study of the first 6 months after unilateral stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29:293–9.CrossRefPubMed Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Somatosensory recovery: a longitudinal study of the first 6 months after unilateral stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29:293–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Campfens SF, Zandvliet SB, Meskers CGM, Schouten AC, Van Putten MJAM, Van Der Kooij H. Poor motor function is associated with reduced sensory processing after stroke. Exp Brain Res. 2015;233:1339–49.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Campfens SF, Zandvliet SB, Meskers CGM, Schouten AC, Van Putten MJAM, Van Der Kooij H. Poor motor function is associated with reduced sensory processing after stroke. Exp Brain Res. 2015;233:1339–49.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Lincoln N, Crow J, Jackson J, Waters G, Adams S, Hodgson P. The unreliability of sensory assessments. Clin Rehabil. 1991;5:273–82.CrossRef Lincoln N, Crow J, Jackson J, Waters G, Adams S, Hodgson P. The unreliability of sensory assessments. Clin Rehabil. 1991;5:273–82.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Bickley L, Szilagyi P. Bates’ guide to physical examination and history-taking. Home Healthc Nurse J Home Care Hosp Prof. 2012;13:992. Bickley L, Szilagyi P. Bates’ guide to physical examination and history-taking. Home Healthc Nurse J Home Care Hosp Prof. 2012;13:992.
12.
go back to reference Hirayama K, Fukutake T, Kawamura M. “Thumb localizing test” for detecting a lesion in the posterior column-medial lemniscal system. J Neurol Sci. 1999;167:45–9.CrossRefPubMed Hirayama K, Fukutake T, Kawamura M. “Thumb localizing test” for detecting a lesion in the posterior column-medial lemniscal system. J Neurol Sci. 1999;167:45–9.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Lincoln NB, Jackson JM, Adams SA. Reliability and revision of the Nottingham sensory assessment for stroke patients study 1: revision of the NSA. Physiotherapy. 1998;84:358–65.CrossRef Lincoln NB, Jackson JM, Adams SA. Reliability and revision of the Nottingham sensory assessment for stroke patients study 1: revision of the NSA. Physiotherapy. 1998;84:358–65.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:232–40.CrossRefPubMed Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:232–40.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Carey LM, Oke LE, Matyas TA. Impaired limb position sense after stroke: a quantitative test for clinical use. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77:1271–8.CrossRefPubMed Carey LM, Oke LE, Matyas TA. Impaired limb position sense after stroke: a quantitative test for clinical use. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77:1271–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Schwamm LH, Pancioli A, Acker JE, Goldstein LB, Zorowitz RD, Shephard TJ, et al. Recommendations for the establishment of stroke systems of care: recommendations from the American Stroke Association’s Task Force on the Development of Stroke Systems. Stroke. 2005;36:690–703.CrossRefPubMed Schwamm LH, Pancioli A, Acker JE, Goldstein LB, Zorowitz RD, Shephard TJ, et al. Recommendations for the establishment of stroke systems of care: recommendations from the American Stroke Association’s Task Force on the Development of Stroke Systems. Stroke. 2005;36:690–703.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Simo LS, Ghez C, Botzer L, Scheidt RA. A quantitative and standardized robotic method for the evaluation of arm proprioception after stroke. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2011;2011:8227–30.PubMedPubMedCentral Simo LS, Ghez C, Botzer L, Scheidt RA. A quantitative and standardized robotic method for the evaluation of arm proprioception after stroke. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2011;2011:8227–30.PubMedPubMedCentral
18.
19.
go back to reference Coderre AM, Zeid AA, Dukelow SP, Demmer MJ, Moore KD, Demers MJ, et al. Assessment of upper-limb sensorimotor function of subacute stroke patients using visually guided reaching. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:528–41.CrossRefPubMed Coderre AM, Zeid AA, Dukelow SP, Demmer MJ, Moore KD, Demers MJ, et al. Assessment of upper-limb sensorimotor function of subacute stroke patients using visually guided reaching. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:528–41.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, Bates B, Cherney LR, Cramer SC, Deruyter F, Eng JJ, Fisher B, Harvey RL, Lang CE. Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery. Stroke. 2016;47(6):e98–169. Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, Bates B, Cherney LR, Cramer SC, Deruyter F, Eng JJ, Fisher B, Harvey RL, Lang CE. Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery. Stroke. 2016;47(6):e98–169.
21.
go back to reference Mercier L, Audet T, Hébert R, Rochette A, Dubois M. Impact of motor, cognitive, and perceptual disorders on ability to perform activities of daily living after stroke. Stroke. 2016;32(11):2602–9.CrossRef Mercier L, Audet T, Hébert R, Rochette A, Dubois M. Impact of motor, cognitive, and perceptual disorders on ability to perform activities of daily living after stroke. Stroke. 2016;32(11):2602–9.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Semrau JA, Wang JC, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Relationship between visuospatial neglect and kinesthetic deficits after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015;29:318–28.CrossRefPubMed Semrau JA, Wang JC, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Relationship between visuospatial neglect and kinesthetic deficits after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015;29:318–28.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Mcgraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:30–46.CrossRef Mcgraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:30–46.CrossRef
24.
25.
go back to reference Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil. 1987;1:6–18.PubMed Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil. 1987;1:6–18.PubMed
26.
go back to reference Halligan PW, Cockburn J, Wilson BA. The behavioural assessment of visual neglect. Neuropsychol Rehabil An Int J. 1991;1:5–32.CrossRef Halligan PW, Cockburn J, Wilson BA. The behavioural assessment of visual neglect. Neuropsychol Rehabil An Int J. 1991;1:5–32.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Gowland C, Stratford P, Ward M, Moreland J, Torresin W, Van Hullenaar S, et al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke. 1993;24:58–63.CrossRefPubMed Gowland C, Stratford P, Ward M, Moreland J, Torresin W, Van Hullenaar S, et al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke. 1993;24:58–63.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Tiffin J, Asher EJ. The Purdue Pegboard: norms and studies of reliability and validity. J Appl Psychol. 1948;32:234–47.CrossRefPubMed Tiffin J, Asher EJ. The Purdue Pegboard: norms and studies of reliability and validity. J Appl Psychol. 1948;32:234–47.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Dukelow SP, Herter TM, Bagg SD, Scott SH. The independence of deficits in position sense and visually guided reaching following stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012;9:72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dukelow SP, Herter TM, Bagg SD, Scott SH. The independence of deficits in position sense and visually guided reaching following stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012;9:72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Connell LA, Tyson SF. Measures of sensation in neurological conditions: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26:68–80.CrossRefPubMed Connell LA, Tyson SF. Measures of sensation in neurological conditions: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26:68–80.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Hillier S, Immink M, Thewlis D. Assessing proprioception: a systematic review of possibilities. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015;29:933–49.CrossRefPubMed Hillier S, Immink M, Thewlis D. Assessing proprioception: a systematic review of possibilities. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015;29:933–49.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. The Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance (RASP): standardization and reliability data. Clin Rehabil. 2002;16:523–33.CrossRefPubMed Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. The Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance (RASP): standardization and reliability data. Clin Rehabil. 2002;16:523–33.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Stolk-Hornsveld F, Crow JL, Hendriks EP, van der Baan R, Harmeling-van der Wel BC. The Erasmus MC modifications to the (revised) Nottingham Sensory Assessment : a reliable somatosensory assessment measure for patients with intracranial disorders. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20:160–72.CrossRefPubMed Stolk-Hornsveld F, Crow JL, Hendriks EP, van der Baan R, Harmeling-van der Wel BC. The Erasmus MC modifications to the (revised) Nottingham Sensory Assessment : a reliable somatosensory assessment measure for patients with intracranial disorders. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20:160–72.CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Juul-kristensen B, Lund H, Hansen K, Christensen H, Danneskiold-Samsøe B, Bliddal H. Test-retest reliability of joint position and kinesthetic sense in the elbow of healthy subjects. Physiother Theory Pract. 2008;24:65–72.CrossRefPubMed Juul-kristensen B, Lund H, Hansen K, Christensen H, Danneskiold-Samsøe B, Bliddal H. Test-retest reliability of joint position and kinesthetic sense in the elbow of healthy subjects. Physiother Theory Pract. 2008;24:65–72.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Lonn J, Crenshaw AG, Djupsjobacka M, Johansson H. Reliability of position sense testing assessed with a fully automated system. Clin Physiol. 2000;20:30–7.CrossRefPubMed Lonn J, Crenshaw AG, Djupsjobacka M, Johansson H. Reliability of position sense testing assessed with a fully automated system. Clin Physiol. 2000;20:30–7.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Anstey KJ, Smith GA, Lord S. Test-retest reliability of a battery of sensory, motor and physiological measures of aging. Percept Mot Skills. 1997;84:831–3.CrossRefPubMed Anstey KJ, Smith GA, Lord S. Test-retest reliability of a battery of sensory, motor and physiological measures of aging. Percept Mot Skills. 1997;84:831–3.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Inter-rater reliability of kinesthetic measurements with the KINARM robotic exoskeleton
Authors
Jennifer A. Semrau
Troy M. Herter
Stephen H. Scott
Sean P. Dukelow
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1743-0003
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-017-0260-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2017 Go to the issue