Methodological considerations for kinematic analysis of upper limbs in healthy and poststroke adults. Part I: A systematic review of sampling and motor tasks

ABSTRACT

Background and Purpose: The purpose of this study was to review the methods used to analyze the kinematics of upper limbs (ULs) of healthy and poststroke adults, namely specificities of sampling and motor tasks.

Summary of review: A database of articles published in the last decade was compiled using the following search terms combinations: (“upper extremity” OR “upper limb” OR arm) AND (kinematics OR motion OR movement) AND (analysis OR assessment OR measurement). The articles included in this review (1) had the purpose to analyze objectively a three-dimension kinematics of ULs, (2) studied functional movements or activities of daily living (ADL) involving uppers limbs, and (3) studied healthy and/or poststroke adults. Fourteen articles were included (four studied a healthy sample, three analyzed poststroke patients, and seven examined both poststroke and healthy participants).

Conclusion: Most of the recommended demographic and stroke information, such as some preexisting conditions to stroke, initial stroke severity, and stroke location, were not collected by all or most of the articles. Time poststroke onset was presented in all articles but showed great variability. Few articles identified anthropometric characteristics and adjusted task environment to them. Most of the samples were composed mainly by males and had a low mean age, which does not represent poststroke population. Most articles analyzed “functional movements”, namely simulations of ADL.

Implication of key findings: Future research should identify the recommended information to allow an adequate stratification. Acute phase after stroke, real ADL with different complexities, and ipsilesional UL should be studied.

KEYWORDS:

• Upper extremity
• kinematic assessment
• stroke
• healthy adults
• demographic information
• stroke information
• activities of daily living

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.