PTOTSystematic ReviewJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2018

Assessment of upper limb use in children with typical development and neurodevelopmental disorders by inertial sensors: a systematic review.

Irene Braito, Martina Maselli, Giuseppina Sgandurra and 5 others

PMID 30400992

WHAT IT FOUND

Wearable sensors on both wrists can objectively measure upper limb movement in children.

They distinguish typical development from neurodevelopmental disorders and track asymmetry. Current evidence is too limited by small sample sizes and varied methods to recommend them as standard clinical tools yet.

Key findings

01In typically developing children, sensors worn on either wrist show minimal differences during gross motor activities, but correctly detect asymmetry during complex bimanual tasks.

02In children with neurodevelopmental disorders, sensors consistently identify greater upper limb asymmetry and lower movement quality compared to typical development.

03Sensor data correlates with changes in clinical assessments after interventions like constraint-induced movement therapy, suggesting potential for monitoring treatment progress.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Most included studies had small sample sizes. There was a lack of control groups in many primary studies. A wide variety of sensor models, placements, and data analysis methods were used, making direct comparison difficult. The review authors could not draw definitive study conclusions due to this heterogeneity.

Declared interests

The study was supported by the Italian Ministry of Health.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume that any commercially available wrist accelerometer is ready for clinical use. The review highlights that different sensors and analysis methods yield different results, and no single protocol has been validated for routine clinical decision-making.

Read it on PubMed →