Getting a kinematic handle on reach-to-grasp: A meta-analysis

Kathryn C. Collins, Niamh C. Kennedy, Allan Clark, Valerie M. Pomeroy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Reach-to-grasp is an essential everyday activity that is often impaired after stroke. The objectives of this review are: 1) identify differences in the kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke, and 2) determine the influence of object location on kinematics. Data sources: MEDLINE, AMED, and Embase databases. Eligibility Criteria: Studies investigating individuals with stroke and neurologically intact control participants completing reach-to-grasp (paretic upper limb) of an object assessed via kinematic assessment (motion analysis). Review Methods: Following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines a meta-analysis comparing kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke. Potential risk of bias was assessed using the Down’s and Black Tool. Data were synthesised by calculating the standardised mean difference (SMD) in kinematic characteristics between adults with and without stroke. Results: Twenty-nine studies met the review criteria, mainly of observational design; 460 individuals with stroke and 324 control participants. Kinematic differences in reach-to-grasp were identified in the central and ipsilateral workspace for example, individuals with stroke exhibited significantly lower peak velocity SMD −1.48 (95% CI −1.94, −1.02), and greater trunk displacement SMD 1.55 (95% CI 0.85, 2.25) than control participants. Included studies were assessed as demonstrating unclear or high potential risk-of-bias. Conclusions: Differences in kinematic characteristics between individuals with and without stroke were identified which may be different reaching in the ipsilateral and central workspace. Suggesting, that object location may influence some kinematic characteristics and not others which may be pertinent when re-training reach-to-grasp.
LanguageEnglish
Pages153-166
Number of pages14
JournalPhysiotherapy
Volume104
Issue number2
Early online date11 Nov 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 30 Jun 2018

Fingerprint

Hand Strength
Biomechanical Phenomena
Meta-Analysis
Stroke
Information Storage and Retrieval
Upper Extremity
MEDLINE
Databases
Guidelines

Keywords

  • reach-to-grasp
  • task performance and analysis
  • upper extremity
  • stroke
  • kinematics

Cite this

Collins, Kathryn C. ; Kennedy, Niamh C. ; Clark, Allan ; Pomeroy, Valerie M. / Getting a kinematic handle on reach-to-grasp: A meta-analysis. 2018 ; Vol. 104, No. 2. pp. 153-166.
@article{467aeed9e1b645a287245f70825c2bc4,
title = "Getting a kinematic handle on reach-to-grasp: A meta-analysis",
abstract = "Background and Objectives: Reach-to-grasp is an essential everyday activity that is often impaired after stroke. The objectives of this review are: 1) identify differences in the kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke, and 2) determine the influence of object location on kinematics. Data sources: MEDLINE, AMED, and Embase databases. Eligibility Criteria: Studies investigating individuals with stroke and neurologically intact control participants completing reach-to-grasp (paretic upper limb) of an object assessed via kinematic assessment (motion analysis). Review Methods: Following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines a meta-analysis comparing kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke. Potential risk of bias was assessed using the Down’s and Black Tool. Data were synthesised by calculating the standardised mean difference (SMD) in kinematic characteristics between adults with and without stroke. Results: Twenty-nine studies met the review criteria, mainly of observational design; 460 individuals with stroke and 324 control participants. Kinematic differences in reach-to-grasp were identified in the central and ipsilateral workspace for example, individuals with stroke exhibited significantly lower peak velocity SMD −1.48 (95{\%} CI −1.94, −1.02), and greater trunk displacement SMD 1.55 (95{\%} CI 0.85, 2.25) than control participants. Included studies were assessed as demonstrating unclear or high potential risk-of-bias. Conclusions: Differences in kinematic characteristics between individuals with and without stroke were identified which may be different reaching in the ipsilateral and central workspace. Suggesting, that object location may influence some kinematic characteristics and not others which may be pertinent when re-training reach-to-grasp.",
keywords = "reach-to-grasp, task performance and analysis, upper extremity, stroke, kinematics",
author = "Collins, {Kathryn C.} and Kennedy, {Niamh C.} and Allan Clark and Pomeroy, {Valerie M.}",
note = "UIR Compliant - evidence uploaded to other files",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
day = "30",
doi = "10.1016/j.physio.2017.10.002",
language = "English",
volume = "104",
pages = "153--166",
number = "2",

}

Getting a kinematic handle on reach-to-grasp: A meta-analysis. / Collins, Kathryn C.; Kennedy, Niamh C.; Clark, Allan; Pomeroy, Valerie M.

Vol. 104, No. 2, 30.06.2018, p. 153-166.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Getting a kinematic handle on reach-to-grasp: A meta-analysis

AU - Collins, Kathryn C.

AU - Kennedy, Niamh C.

AU - Clark, Allan

AU - Pomeroy, Valerie M.

N1 - UIR Compliant - evidence uploaded to other files

PY - 2018/6/30

Y1 - 2018/6/30

N2 - Background and Objectives: Reach-to-grasp is an essential everyday activity that is often impaired after stroke. The objectives of this review are: 1) identify differences in the kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke, and 2) determine the influence of object location on kinematics. Data sources: MEDLINE, AMED, and Embase databases. Eligibility Criteria: Studies investigating individuals with stroke and neurologically intact control participants completing reach-to-grasp (paretic upper limb) of an object assessed via kinematic assessment (motion analysis). Review Methods: Following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines a meta-analysis comparing kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke. Potential risk of bias was assessed using the Down’s and Black Tool. Data were synthesised by calculating the standardised mean difference (SMD) in kinematic characteristics between adults with and without stroke. Results: Twenty-nine studies met the review criteria, mainly of observational design; 460 individuals with stroke and 324 control participants. Kinematic differences in reach-to-grasp were identified in the central and ipsilateral workspace for example, individuals with stroke exhibited significantly lower peak velocity SMD −1.48 (95% CI −1.94, −1.02), and greater trunk displacement SMD 1.55 (95% CI 0.85, 2.25) than control participants. Included studies were assessed as demonstrating unclear or high potential risk-of-bias. Conclusions: Differences in kinematic characteristics between individuals with and without stroke were identified which may be different reaching in the ipsilateral and central workspace. Suggesting, that object location may influence some kinematic characteristics and not others which may be pertinent when re-training reach-to-grasp.

AB - Background and Objectives: Reach-to-grasp is an essential everyday activity that is often impaired after stroke. The objectives of this review are: 1) identify differences in the kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke, and 2) determine the influence of object location on kinematics. Data sources: MEDLINE, AMED, and Embase databases. Eligibility Criteria: Studies investigating individuals with stroke and neurologically intact control participants completing reach-to-grasp (paretic upper limb) of an object assessed via kinematic assessment (motion analysis). Review Methods: Following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines a meta-analysis comparing kinematic characteristics of reach-to-grasp between individuals with and without stroke. Potential risk of bias was assessed using the Down’s and Black Tool. Data were synthesised by calculating the standardised mean difference (SMD) in kinematic characteristics between adults with and without stroke. Results: Twenty-nine studies met the review criteria, mainly of observational design; 460 individuals with stroke and 324 control participants. Kinematic differences in reach-to-grasp were identified in the central and ipsilateral workspace for example, individuals with stroke exhibited significantly lower peak velocity SMD −1.48 (95% CI −1.94, −1.02), and greater trunk displacement SMD 1.55 (95% CI 0.85, 2.25) than control participants. Included studies were assessed as demonstrating unclear or high potential risk-of-bias. Conclusions: Differences in kinematic characteristics between individuals with and without stroke were identified which may be different reaching in the ipsilateral and central workspace. Suggesting, that object location may influence some kinematic characteristics and not others which may be pertinent when re-training reach-to-grasp.

KW - reach-to-grasp

KW - task performance and analysis

KW - upper extremity

KW - stroke

KW - kinematics

U2 - 10.1016/j.physio.2017.10.002

DO - 10.1016/j.physio.2017.10.002

M3 - Article

VL - 104

SP - 153

EP - 166

IS - 2

ER -