Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Participant characteristics.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Objects used to assess grasping.

Half-filled water bottle (height 22 cm, upper diameter 3 cm and lower diameter 6cm, weight 260 grams); Teaspoon (length 14 cm, thickness 1 mm, weight 90 grams), Packet of paper tissues (height 7.5 cm, length 5 cm, thickness 2.5 cm, weight 20 grams) and Tennis ball (diameter 6 cm, weight 58 grams).

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Experimental set-up.

The circles indicate the position of the cameras. One camera was positioned directly above the object (80 cm high) (C1), and the other 2 were placed at a height of 75 cm on the contralateral side of the hand being evaluated: one 30° to the sagittal plane (at a distance of 75 cm from the object in the horizontal plane) (C2) and the other 30° behind the frontal plane (at a distance of 70 cm from the object in the horizontal plane) (C3).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 2.

Functional Grasp Scale (FGS).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 3.

ARAT/FMA-UE scores.

The bars represent the number of patients in each score-group for the FMA-UE (Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity) and ARAT (Action Research Arm Test scores). The grouping of scores was based on the study by, Hoonhorst et al [42].

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Grasp-types.

a: Multi-pulpar, b: Pluri-digital c: Lateral Pinch, d: Palmar, e: Digito-palmar, f: Raking, g: Ulnar, h: Inter-digital.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 3.

Distribution of the grasp-types across the 456 trials for each object.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 5.

Mean FGS, FMA-UE and ARAT score in individual patients.

The patients are ranked according to their grasp type and their FGS score (see S3 Table). Horizontal bars represent the objects the patients were able to grasp (Black: spoon, dark grey: bottle, light grey: ball, white: tissues).

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

FMA-UE and mean FGS scores as a function of ARAT score.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

ARAT and FMA-UE scores of individual patients for each grasp-type.

In bold the median ARAT and FMA-UE scores. For clarity, ARAT and FMA-UE scores have been normalised out of 100.

More »

Fig 7 Expand