Innovative evaluation of dexterity in pediatrics.

STUDY DESIGN: Review paper. INTRODUCTION: Hand dexterity is multifaceted and essential to the performance of daily tasks. Timed performance and precision demands are the most common features of quantitative dexterity testing. Measurement concepts such as rate of completion, in-hand manipulation and dynamic force control of instabilities are being integrated into assessment tools for the pediatric population. PURPOSE: To review measurement concepts inherent in pediatric dexterity testing and introduce concepts that are infrequently measured or novel as exemplified with two assessment tools. METHODS: Measurement concepts included in common assessment tools are introduced first. We then describe seldom measured and novel concepts embedded in two instruments; the Functional Dexterity Test (FDT) and the Strength-Dexterity (SD) Test. DISCUSSION: The inclusion of novel yet informative tools and measurement concepts in our assessments could aid our understanding of atypical dexterity, and potentially contribute to the design of targeted therapy programs

Spatio-temporal analysis reveals active control of both task-relevant and task-irrelevant variables

The Uncontrolled Manifold hypothesis and Minimal Intervention principle propose that the observed differential variability across task relevant (i.e., task goals) vs. irrelevant (i.e., in the null space of those goals) variables is evidence of a separation of task variables for efficient neural control, ranked by their respective variabilities (sometimes referred to as hierarchy of control). Support for this comes from spatial domain analyses (i.e., structure of) of kinematic, kinetic and EMG variability. While proponents admit the possibility of textsl{preferential} as opposed to strictly textsl{uncontrolled} variables, such distinctions have only begun to be quantified or considered in the temporal domain when inferring control action. Here we extend the study of task variability during tripod static grasp to the temporal domain by applying diffusion analysis. We show that both task-relevant and task-irrelevant parameters show corrective action at some time scales; and conversely, that task-relevant parameters do not show corrective action at other time scales. That is, the spatial fluctuations of fingertip forces show, as expected, greater ranges of variability in task-irrelevant variables (> 98% associated with changes in total grasp force; vs. onl

On neuromechanical approaches for the study of biological and robotic grasp and manipulation

abstract: Biological and robotic grasp and manipulation are undeniably similar at the level of mechanical task performance. However, their underlying fundamental biological vs. engineering mechanisms are, by definition, dramatically different and can even be antithetical. Even our approach to each is diametrically opposite: inductive science for the study of biological systems vs. engineering synthesis for the design and construction of robotic systems. The past 20 years have seen several conceptual advances in both fields and the quest to unify them. Chief among them is the reluctant recognition that their underlying fundamental mechanisms may actually share limited common ground, while exhibiting many fundamental differences. This recognition is particularly liberating because it allows us to resolve and move beyond multiple paradoxes and contradictions that arose from the initial reasonable assumption of a large common ground. Here, we begin by introducing the perspective of neuromechanics, which emphasizes that real-world behavior emerges from the intimate interactions among the physical structure of the system, the mechanical requirements of a task, the feasible neural control actions to produce it, and the ability of the neuromuscular system to adapt through interactions with the environment. This allows us to articulate a succinct overview of a few salient conceptual paradoxes and contradictions regarding under-determined vs. over-determined mechanics, under- vs. over-actuated control, prescribed vs. emergent function, learning vs. implementation vs. adaptation, prescriptive vs. descriptive synergies, and optimal vs. habitual performance. We conclude by presenting open questions and suggesting directions for future research. We hope this frank and open-minded assessment of the state-of-the-art will encourage and guide these communities to continue to interact and make progress in these important areas at the interface of neuromechanics, neuroscience, rehabilitation and robotics.The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-017-0305-

Feasibility Theory Reconciles and Informs Alternative Approaches to Neuromuscular Control

We present Feasibility Theory, a conceptual and computational framework to unify today's theories of neuromuscular control. We begin by describing how the musculoskeletal anatomy of the limb, the need to control individual tendons, and the physics of a motor task uniquely specify the family of all valid muscle activations that accomplish it (its ‘feasible activation space’). For our example of producing static force with a finger driven by seven muscles, computational geometry characterizes—in a complete way—the structure of feasible activation spaces as 3-dimensional polytopes embedded in 7-D. The feasible activation space for a given task is the landscape where all neuromuscular learning, control, and performance must occur. This approach unifies current theories of neuromuscular control because the structure of feasible activation spaces can be separately approximated as either low-dimensional basis functions (synergies), high-dimensional joint probability distributions (Bayesian priors), or fitness landscapes (to optimize cost functions)