Skip to content

Similaries and differences between pointing and interception

Similaries and differences in joint angle variability between pointing and interception

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON24192
Enrollment
30
Registered
2016-07-20
Start date
2016-07-20
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-02-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Motor control

Interventions

Several different virtual balls will be presented on a plasma screen horizontally positioned in a table (Panasonic TH-50PY70F, width: 110cm, height: 62cm). There will be two conditions, reaching and i

Sponsors

University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG)
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: The subjects included in this study are able bodied and right handed, with normal or corrected to normal vision. Both male and female subject will be included. All subjects included will be between 18 and 30 years of age.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Subjects with (history of) pain or musculoskeletal impairments of the arms or upper body will not be included. The same accounts for subjects with prior experience in the use of myoelectric devices and subjects younger than 18 or older than 30.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Using Optotrak we measure the trajectories of rigid bodies (see point 12 for more information). From this we derive GEV, NGEV and the ratio of these two for the 40 trials in the first part and for the 40 trials with a linear trajectory in the second part (uncontrolled manifold method). These two measures will be compared.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Kinematic measures, joint angles, GEV, NGEV and ratio will be computed for all trials.

Contacts

Public ContactInge Tuitert

UMCG

i.tuitert@umcg.nl

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)