Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/97310
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciencesen_US
dc.creatorWei, WXJen_US
dc.creatorFong, KNKen_US
dc.creatorChung, RCKen_US
dc.creatorMyint, JMWWen_US
dc.creatorCheung, HKYen_US
dc.creatorChow, ESLen_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-06T01:13:39Z-
dc.date.available2023-03-06T01:13:39Z-
dc.identifier.issn1040-0435en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/97310-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Inc.en_US
dc.rights© 2018 RESNAen_US
dc.rightsThis is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Assistive Technology on 25 Jan 2018 (published online), available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/10400435.2017.1414085.en_US
dc.subjectAccelerometeren_US
dc.subjectLearned non-useen_US
dc.subjectParetic upper extremityen_US
dc.subjectStrokeen_US
dc.titleUtility of a unilateral accelerometer for monitoring upper extremity use in subacute stroke patients after discharge from hospitalen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.spage193en_US
dc.identifier.epage198en_US
dc.identifier.volume31en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/10400435.2017.1414085en_US
dcterms.abstractThis study was to investigate the utility of a unilateral accelerometer, which is commonly used for monitoring upper extremity performance, in subacute stroke patients by comparing its use with other upper extremity assessments. Twenty-four participants were recruited and required to wear an accelerometer on the affected wrist for 3 hours daily for the first 4 weeks after discharge from hospital. Assessments included Fugl-Meyer Assessment–Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Box and Block Test (BBT), and self-reporting Motor Activity Log (MAL). Assessments were made at 0, 4, 8, and 12 weeks after hospital discharge. How long the device was worn, movement amount, and movement percentage were extracted from the accelerometer. Throughout the 12-week observation, significant improvements in the participants were shown by the FMA-UE, ARAT, and BBT (p < 0.001, p = 0.026, and p < 0.001, respectively), but no significant change could be found using MAL or the accelerometer parameters across time (p = 0.068 to 0.999). There was moderate-to-good correlation among the assessments; however, no significant correlation was obtained between any of the assessments and the accelerometer data. We suggest that the unilateral accelerometer might not be useful to reflect actual arm functions in daily activities.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationAssistive technology, 2019, v. 31, no. 4, p. 193-198en_US
dcterms.isPartOfAssistive technologyen_US
dcterms.issued2019-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85040988697-
dc.identifier.pmid29215963-
dc.description.validate202303 bckwen_US
dc.description.oaAccepted Manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberRS-0310-
dc.description.fundingSourceRGCen_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.identifier.OPUS6814064-
dc.description.oaCategoryGreen (AAM)en_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fong_Utility_Unilateral_Accelerometer.pdfPre-Published version1 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Final Accepted Manuscript
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

72
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

Downloads

39
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

9
Citations as of Dec 19, 2025

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

7
Citations as of Dec 18, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.