IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0196205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Test-retest reliability of the KINARM end-point robot for assessment of sensory, motor and neurocognitive function in young adult athletes

Author

Listed:
  • Cameron S Mang
  • Tara A Whitten
  • Madeline S Cosh
  • Stephen H Scott
  • J Preston Wiley
  • Chantel T Debert
  • Sean P Dukelow
  • Brian W Benson

Abstract

Background: Current assessment tools for sport-related concussion are limited by a reliance on subjective interpretation and patient symptom reporting. Robotic assessments may provide more objective and precise measures of neurological function than traditional clinical tests. Objective: To determine the reliability of assessments of sensory, motor and cognitive function conducted with the KINARM end-point robotic device in young adult elite athletes. Methods: Sixty-four randomly selected healthy, young adult elite athletes participated. Twenty-five individuals (25 M, mean age±SD, 20.2±2.1 years) participated in a within-season study, where three assessments were conducted within a single season (assessments labeled by session: S1, S2, S3). An additional 39 individuals (28M; 22.8±6.0 years) participated in a year-to-year study, where annual pre-season assessments were conducted for three consecutive seasons (assessments labeled by year: Y1, Y2, Y3). Forty-four parameters from five robotic tasks (Visually Guided Reaching, Position Matching, Object Hit, Object Hit and Avoid, and Trail Making B) and overall Task Scores describing performance on each task were quantified. Results: Test-retest reliability was determined by intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) between the first and second, and second and third assessments. In the within-season study, ICCs were ≥0.50 for 68% of parameters between S1 and S2, 80% of parameters between S2 and S3, and for three of the five Task Scores both between S1 and S2, and S2 and S3. In the year-to-year study, ICCs were ≥0.50 for 64% of parameters between Y1 and Y2, 82% of parameters between Y2 and Y3, and for four of the five Task Scores both between Y1 and Y2, and Y2 and Y3. Conclusions: Overall, the results suggest moderate-to-good test-retest reliability for the majority of parameters measured by the KINARM robot in healthy young adult elite athletes. Future work will consider the potential use of this information for clinical assessment of concussion-related neurological deficits.

Suggested Citation

  • Cameron S Mang & Tara A Whitten & Madeline S Cosh & Stephen H Scott & J Preston Wiley & Chantel T Debert & Sean P Dukelow & Brian W Benson, 2018. "Test-retest reliability of the KINARM end-point robot for assessment of sensory, motor and neurocognitive function in young adult athletes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-21, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0196205
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0196205
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0196205&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0196205?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0196205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.