Comparison of reach-to-grasp coordination during obstacle avoidance between older and younger adults
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Reach-to-grasp movement is essential for activity daily living requiring the coordination of reach and grasp components. However, substantial controversy regarding previous findings that reach-to-grasp coordination deficit in older adult.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare reach-to-grasp kinematics and coordination during obstacle avoidance between younger and older adult.
Method: Twenty right-handed participants were divided into younger (ages 19-22) and older group (ages 61-69), 10 participants in each group. The participants reached and grasped the object 30 cm far from starting switch. They were instructed to move as fast as possible and do not crash an obstacle. The kinematic data were recorded by electromagnetic motion analysis (MotionMonitor). Cross correlation analysis were used for analyzing reach-to-grasp coordination. Result: The results showed that kinematic of reach component in timing aspect was longer (Time to maximum velocity; TMV, 291.67 ±92.51 ms) and maximum velocity was slower in older adult (Maximum velocity; MV, 93.42 ±28.96 cm/s) compared to younger (TMV, 194.20 ±55.83 ms and MV, 128.80 ±26.87 cm/s; p<0.05). Kinematic of grasp component in timing aspect (Time to maximum aperture; TMA, 516.40 ±154.73 ms) and grasp planning were slower in older adult compared to younger (TMA, 330.47 ±80.06 ms; p<0.01 and Relative time to maximum aperture; %TMA, 67.59 ±6.16%; p<0.05). For reach-to-grasp coordination, maximum time lag for temporal coordination was longer in older adult (Tmax, 215.40 ±86.24 ms) compared to younger (Tmax, 98.20 ±36.37 ms; p<0.01). Conclusion: It can be concluded that the older adults have deficit in kinematic movement and timing aspect of reach-to-grasp coordination compared with younger ones.
Article Details
References
2. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M. Motor control: theory and practical applications. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1995.
3. Nicolay CW, Walker AL. Grip strength and endurance: Influences of anthropometric variation, hand dominance, and gender. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2005; 35(7): 605-18.
4. Cole KJ, Rotella DL, Harper JG. Tactile impairments cannot explain the effect of age on a grasp and lift task. Exp Brain Res 1998; 121(3): 263-9.
5. Bennett KM, Castiello U. Reach to grasp: changes with age. J Gerontol 1994; 49(1): 1-7.
6. Bennett KM, Castiello U. Reorganization of prehension components following perturbation of object size. Psychol Aging 1995; 10(2): 204-14.
7. McWhirter T. Effect of aging in reaching and grasping movements: A kinematic analysis of movement context. Ontario, Canada: University of Waterloo; 2011.
8. Tretriluxana J, Gordon J, Winstein CJ. Manual asymmetries in grasp pre-shaping and transport-grasp coordination. Exp Brain Res 2008; 188(2): 305-15.
9. Runnarong N, Tretriluxana J, Hiengkaew V, Vachalathiti R. Reach-to-grasp co-ordination in the paretic limbs of individuals with stroke: insight from a barrier paradigm. J Med Assoc Thai 2014; 97 Suppl 7:S84-88.
10. Marmon AR, Pascoe MA, Schwartz RS, Enoka RM. Association among strength, steadiness and hand function across the adult life span. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011; 43 (4): 560-7.
11. Grabowski PJ, Mason AH. Age differences in the control of a precision reach to grasp task within a desktop virtual environment. INT J HUM-COMPUT ST 2014; 72(4); 383-92.
12. Cicerale A, Ambron E, Lingnau A, Rumiati RI. A kinematic analysis or age-related changes in grasping to use and grasping to move common objects. Acta Psychologica 2014; 151: 134–42.
13. Wing AM, Turton A, Fraser C. Grasp size and accuracy of approach in reaching. J Motor Behav 1986; 18 (3): 245-60 [Abstract].
14. Yan JH, Thomas JR, Stelmach GE, Thomas KT. Developmental features of rapid aiming arm movements across the lifespan. J Mot Behav 2000; 32(2):121-40.
15. Welford AT. Reaction time, speed of performance, and age. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1988; 515: 1-17.
16. Thelen DG, Muriuki M, James J, Schultz AB, Ashton-Miller JA, Alexander NB. Muscle activities used by young and old adults when stepping to regain balance during a forward fall. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2000; 10(2): 93-101.
17. Lawrence EL, Dayanidhi S, Fassola I, Requejo P, Leclercq C, Winstein CJ, & Valero-Cuevas FJ. Outcome measures for hand function naturally reveal three latent domains in older adults: strength, coordinated upper extremity function, and sensorimotor processing. Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2015; 7: 108.
18. Alberts JL, Saling M, Adler CH, Stelmach GE. Disruptions in the reach-to-grasp actions of Parkinson’s patients. Exp Brain Res 2000; 134: 353-62.
19. Khacharoen S, Tretriluxana J, Chaiyawat P, Pisarnpong A. Impaired reach-to-grasp actions during barrier avoidance in individuals with Parkinson’s disease. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand 2015; 98(9): 889-95.
20. Alberts JL, Saling M, Stelmach GE. Alterations in transport path differentially affect temporal and spatial movement parameters. Exp Brain Res 2002; 143: 417-25.
21. Saling M, Alberts J, Stelmach GE, Bloedel JR. Reach-to-grasp movements during obstacle avoidance. Exp Brain Res 2002; 118: 251-8.
22. Haik MN, Alburquerque-Sendín F, Camargo PR. Reliability and minimal detectable change of 3-dimensional scapular orientation in individuals with and without shoulder impingement. JOSPT 2014; 44(5): 341-9.
23. Wing AM, Turton A, Fraser C. Grasp size and accuracy of approach in reaching. Journal of motor behavior 1986; 18: 245-60.
