Ambulatory measurement of upper limb usage and mobility-related activities during normal daily life with an upper limb-activity monitor: A feasibility study

  • F. C. SchasfoortEmail author
  • J. B. J. Bussmann
  • H. J. Stam


The aim of this research was to assess the ability of an upper limb-activity monitor (ULAM) to discriminate between upper limb usage and non-usage in healthy and disabled subjects during normal daily life. The ULAM was based on ambulatory accelerometry and consisted of several acceleration sensors connected to a small recorder worn around the waist. While wearing this ULAM, four healthy and four disabled subjects performed an activity protocol representing normal daily life upper limb usage or non-usage. The motility feature (derived from the raw acceleration signals) was used as a measure of the extent of upper limb usage. Agreement scores between ULAM output and videotape recordings (reference method) were calculated. ULAM data that were of special interest for rehabilitation were detected satisfactorily (overall agreement 83.9%). There were no systematic differences in the agreement percentages between healthy and disabled subjects for mobility-related activities (p=0.345) and the different forms of upper limb usage or non-usage (p=0.715). The ULAM can be used in future studies in subjects with upper limb disorders to discriminate between upper limb usage and non-usage during performance of mobility-related activities to determine activity limitations.


Accelerometry Upper limb usage Mobility-related activities 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Van Den Berg-Emons, H. J. G., Bussmann, J. B. J., Balk, A. H. M. M., andStam, H. J. (2000): ‘Validity of ambulatory accelerometry to quantify physical activity in heart failure’,Scand. J. Rehab. Med.,32, pp. 187–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouten, C. V., Koekkoek, K. T., Verduin, M., Kodde, R., andJanssen, J. D. (1997): ‘A triaxial accelerometer and portable data processing unit for the assessment of daily physical activity,’,IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.,44, pp. 136–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bussmann, J. B. J., Veltink, P. H., Koelma, F., Lummel, R. C. V., andStam, H. J. (1995): ‘Ambulatory monitoring of mobility-related activities: the initial phase of the development of an activity monitor’,Eur. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil.,2, p. 7Google Scholar
  4. Bussmann, J. B. J., Reuvekamp, P. J., Veltink, P. H., Martens, W. L., andStam, H. J. (1998a). ‘Validity and reliability of measurements obtained amputation,’Phys. Ther.,78, pp. 989–998Google Scholar
  5. Bussmann, J. B. J., Tulen, J. H., Van Herel, E. C., andStam, H. J. (1998b): ‘Quantification of physical activities by means of ambulatory accelerometry: a validation study’,Psychophysiology,35, pp. 488–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bussmann, J. B. J., Van de Laar, Y. M., Neeleman, M. P., andBtam, H. J. (1998c): ‘Ambulatory accelerometry to quantify motor behaviour in patients after failed back surgery: a validation study’,Pain,74, pp. 153–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bussmann, J. B. J., Martens, W. L. J., Tulen, J. H. M., Schasfoort, F. C., Van Den Berg-Emons, H. J. G., andStam, H. J. (2001): ‘Measuring daily behaviour using ambulatory accelerometry: the activity monitor’,Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput.,33, pp. 349–356Google Scholar
  8. Duckworth, D. (1995): ‘Measuring disability: the role of the ICIDH’,Disabil. Rehabil.,17, pp. 338–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Geurts, A. C. H., Mulder, T., Raj, R., andNienhuis, B. (1991): ‘From the analysis of movement to the analysis of skills: bridging the gap between laboratory and clinic’,J. Rehabil. Sci.,9, p. 12Google Scholar
  10. Jain, A., Martens, W. L. J., Mutz, G., Weiss, R. K., andStephan, E. (1996): inFahrenberg, J., andMyrtek, M. (Eds): ‘Ambulatory assessment: computer-assisted psychological and psychophysiological methods in monitoring and field studies’ (Hogrefe & Huber Publishers, Seattle, 1996), pp. 215–236Google Scholar
  11. Keil, A., Elbert, T., andTaub, E. (1999): ‘Relation of accelerometer and EMG recordings for the measurement of upper extremity movement’,J. Psychophysiol.,13, pp. 77–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Keith, R. A. (1994): ‘Functional status and health status’,Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil.,75, pp. 478–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Martens, W. L. J. (1992): ‘The fast time-frequency transform (FTFT): a novel approach to the instantaneous spectrum’,Proceedings of IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology SocietyGoogle Scholar
  14. Matthews, C. E., andFreedson, P. S. (1995): ‘Field trial of a three-dimensional activity monitor: comparison with self report’,Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.,27, pp. 1071–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Patterson, S. M., Krantz, D. S., Montgomery, L. C., Deuster, P. A., Hedges, S. M., andNebel, L. E. (1993): ‘Automated physical activity monitoring: validation and comparison with physiological and self-report measures’,Psychophysiology,30, pp. 296–305Google Scholar
  16. Renfrew, J. W., Moore, A. M., Grady, C., Robertson-Tchabo, E. A., Cutler, N. R., Rapoport, S. I., Colburn, T. R., andSmith, B. M. (1984): ‘A method for measuring arm movements in man under ambulatory conditions,’Ergonomics,27, pp. 651–661Google Scholar
  17. Renfrew, J. W., Pettigrew, K. D., andRapoport, S. I. (1987): ‘Motor activity and sleep duration as a function of age in healthy men’,Physiol. Behav.,41, pp. 627–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Richards, J. M. Jr, andHemstreet, M. P. (1994): ‘Measures of life quality, role performance, and functional status in asthma research’,Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.,149, pp. S40–43Google Scholar
  19. Tamura, T., Fujimoto, T., Sakaki, H., Higashi, Y., Yoshida, T., andTogawa, T. (1997): ‘A solid-state ambulatory physical activity monitor and its application to measuring daily activity of the elderly’,J. Med. Eng. Technol.,21, pp. 96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Taub, E., Uswatte, G., andPidikiti, R. (1999): ‘Constraint-induced movement therapy: a new family of techniques with broad application to physical rehabilitation—a clinical review’,J. Rehabil. Res. Dev.,36, pp. 237–251Google Scholar
  21. Tulen, J. H., Bussmann, H. B., Van Steenis, H. G., Pepplinkhuizen, L., andMan Int Veld, A. J. (1997): ‘A novel tool to quantify physical activities: ambulatory accelerometry in psychopharmacology’,J. Clin. Psychopharmacol.,17, pp. 202–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tulen, J. H., Stronks, D. L., Bussmann, J. B., Pepplinkhuizen, L., andPasschier, J. (2000): ‘Towards an objective quantitative assessment of daily functioning in migraine: a feasibility study’,Pain,86, pp. 139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Uswatte, G., Miltner, W. H., Foo, B., Varma, M., Moran, S., andTaub, E. (2000): ‘Objective measurement of functional upper-extremity movement using accelerometer recordings transformed with a threshold filter’,Stroke,31, pp. 662–667Google Scholar
  24. Van Hilten, B., Hoff, J. I., Middelkoop, H. A., Van Der Velde, E. A., Kerkhof, G. A., Wauquier, A., Kamphuisen, H. A., andRoos, R. A. (1994): ‘Sleep disruption in Parkinson's disease. Assessment by continuous activity monitoring,’Arch. Neuro.,51, pp. 922–928Google Scholar
  25. Van Vugt, J. P., Van Hilten, B. J., andRoos, R. A. (1996): ‘Hypokinesia in Huntington's disease’,Mov. Disord.,11, pp. 384–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Veltink, P. H., Bussmann, H. B., De Vries, W., Martens, W. L., andVan Lummel, R. C. (1996): ‘Detection of static and dynamic activities using uniaxial accelerometers’,IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng.,4, pp. 375–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFMBE 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. C. Schasfoort
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. B. J. Bussmann
    • 1
  • H. J. Stam
    • 1
  1. 1.Erasmus University Rotterdam/University Hospital Rotterdam DijkzigtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations