Search for: All records

Monitoring posture and movement accurately and efficiently is essential for both physical therapy and athletic training evaluation and interventions. Motion Tape (MT), a self-adhesive wearable skin-strain sensor made of piezoresistive graphene nanosheets (GNS), has demonstrated promise in capturing low back posture and movements. However, to address some of its limitations, this work explores alternative materials by replacing GNS with multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT). This study aimed to characterize the electromechanical properties of MWCNT-based MT. Cyclic load tests for different peak tensile strains ranging from 1% to 10% were performed on MWCNT-MT made with an aqueous ink of 2% MWCNT. Additional tests to examine load rate sensitivity and fatigue were also conducted. After characterizing the properties of MWCNT-MT, a human subject study with 10 participants was designed to test its ability to capture different postures and movements. Sets of six sensors were made from each material (GNS and MWCNT) and applied in pairs at three levels along each side of the lumbar spine. To record movement of the lower back, all participants performed forward flexion, left and right bending, and left and right rotation movements. The results showed that MWCNT-MT exceeded GNS-MT with respect to consistency of signal stability even when strain limits were surpassed. In addition, both types of MT could assess lower back movements. 

Background: Motion Tape (MT) is a low-profile, disposable, self-adhesive wearable sensor that measures skin strain. Preliminary studies have validated MT for measuring lower back movement. However, further analysis is needed to determine if MT can be used to measure lower back muscle engagement. The purpose of this study was to measure differences in MT strain between conditions in which the lower back muscles were relaxed versus maximally activated. Methods: Ten participants without low back pain were tested. A matrix of six MTs was placed on the lower back, and strain data were captured under a series of conditions. The first condition was a baseline trial, in which participants lay prone and the muscles of the lower back were relaxed. The subsequent trials were maximum voluntary isometric contractions (MVICs), in which participants did not move, but resisted the examiner force in extension or rotational directions to maximally engage their lower back muscles. The mean MT strain was calculated for each condition. A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to analyze the effects of conditions (baseline, extension, right rotation, and left rotation) and MT position (1–6) on the MT strain. Post hoc analyses were conducted for significant effects from the overall analysis. Results: The results of the ANOVA revealed a significant main effect of condition (p < 0.001) and a significant interaction effect of sensor and condition (p = 0.01). There were significant differences in MT strain between the baseline condition and the extension and rotation MVIC conditions, respectively, for sensors 4, 5, and 6 (p = 0.01–0.04). The largest differences in MT strain were observed between baseline and rotation conditions for sensors 4, 5, and 6. Conclusions: MT can capture maximal lower back muscle engagement while the trunk remains in a stationary position. Lower sensors are better able to capture muscle engagement than upper sensors. Furthermore, MT captured muscle engagement during rotation conditions better than during extension. 

BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a significant public health problem that can result in physical disability and financial burden for the individual and society. Physical therapy is effective for managing LBP and includes evaluation of posture and movement, interventions directed at modifying posture and movement, and prescription of exercises. However, physical therapists have limited tools for objective evaluation of low back posture and movement and monitoring of exercises, and this evaluation is limited to the time frame of a clinical encounter. There is a need for a valid tool that can be used to evaluate low back posture and movement and monitor exercises outside the clinic. To address this need, a fabric-based, wearable sensor, Motion Tape (MT), was developed and adapted for a low back use case. MT is a low-profile, disposable, self-adhesive, skin-strain sensor developed by spray coating piezoresistive graphene nanocomposites directly onto commercial kinesiology tape. ObjectiveThe objectives of this study were to (1) validate MT for measuring low back posture and movement and (2) assess the acceptability of MT for users. MethodsA total of 10 participants without LBP were tested. A 3D optical motion capture system was used as a reference standard to measure low back kinematics. Retroreflective markers and a matrix of MTs were placed on the low back to measure kinematics (motion capture) and strain (MT) simultaneously during low back movements in the sagittal, frontal, and axial planes. Cross-correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate the concurrent validity of MT strain in reference motion capture kinematics during each movement. The acceptability of MT was assessed using semistructured interviews conducted with each participant after laboratory testing. Interview data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis to identify themes and subthemes of user acceptability. ResultsVisual inspection of concurrent MT strain and kinematics of the low back indicated that MT can distinguish between different movement directions. Cross-correlation coefficients between MT strain and motion capture kinematics ranged from –0.915 to 0.983, and the strength of the correlations varied across MT placements and low back movement directions. Regarding user acceptability, participants expressed enthusiasm toward MT and believed that it would be helpful for remote interventions for LBP but provided suggestions for improvement. ConclusionsMT was able to distinguish between different low back movements, and most MTs demonstrated moderate to high correlation with motion capture kinematics. This preliminary laboratory validation of MT provides a basis for future device improvements, which will also involve testing in a free-living environment. Overall, users found MT acceptable for use in physical therapy for managing LBP. 

BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a costly global health condition that affects individuals of all ages and genders. Physical therapy (PT) is a commonly used and effective intervention for the management of LBP and incorporates movement assessment and therapeutic exercise. A newly developed wearable, fabric-based sensor system, Motion Tape, uses novel sensing and data modeling to measure lumbar spine movements unobtrusively and thus offers potential benefits when used in conjunction with PT. However, physical therapists’ acceptance of Motion Tape remains unexplored. ObjectiveThe primary aim of this research study was to evaluate physical therapists’ acceptance of Motion Tape to be used for the management of LBP. The secondary aim was to explore physical therapists’ recommendations for future device development. MethodsLicensed physical therapists from the American Physical Therapy Association Academy of Leadership Technology Special Interest Group participated in this study. Overall, 2 focus groups (FGs; N=8) were conducted, in which participants were presented with Motion Tape samples and examples of app data output on a poster. Informed by the Technology Acceptance Model, we conducted semistructured FGs and explored the wearability, usefulness, and ease of use of and suggestions for improvements in Motion Tape for PT management of LBP. FG data were transcribed and analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis. ResultsRegarding wearability, participants perceived that Motion Tape would be able to adhere for several days, with some variability owing to external factors. Feedback was positive for the low-profile and universal fit, but discomfort owing to wires and potential friction with clothing was of concern. Other concerns included difficulty with self-application and potential skin sensitivity. Regarding usefulness, participants expressed that Motion Tape would enhance the efficiency and specificity of assessments and treatment. Regarding ease of use, participants stated that the app would be easy, but data management and challenges with interpretation were of concern. Physical therapists provided several recommendations for future design improvements including having a wireless system or removable wires, customizable sizes for the tape, and output including range of motion data and summary graphs and adding app features that consider patient input and context. ConclusionsSeveral themes related to Motion Tape’s wearability, usefulness, and ease of use were identified. Overall, physical therapists expressed acceptance of Motion Tape’s potential for assessing and monitoring low back posture and movement, both within and outside clinical settings. Participants expressed that Motion Tape would be a valuable tool for the personalized treatment of LBP but highlighted several future improvements needed for Motion Tape to be used in practice.