Limits...
The selection of the appropriate computer interface device for patients with high cervical cord injury.

Kim DG, Lee BS, Lim SE, Kim DA, Hwang SI, Yim YL, Park JM - Ann Rehabil Med (2013)

Bottom Line: The third was a 13-year-old patient with NLI C1, ASIA-B.The IntegraMouse enabling clicking and dragging with fine movements of the lips.We expect the standard proposed in this study will be helpful.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Rehabilitation, National Rehabilitation Center, Seoul, Korea.

ABSTRACT
In order to determine the most suitable computer interfaces for patients with high cervical cord injury, we report three cases of applications of special input devices. The first was a 49-year-old patient with neurological level of injury (NLI) C4, American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (ASIA)-A. He could move the cursor by using a webcam-based Camera Mouse. Moreover, clicking the mouse could only be performed by pronation of the forearm on the modified Micro Light Switch. The second case was a 41-year-old patient with NLI C3, ASIA-A. The SmartNav 4AT which responds according to head movements could provide stable performance in clicking and dragging. The third was a 13-year-old patient with NLI C1, ASIA-B. The IntegraMouse enabling clicking and dragging with fine movements of the lips. Selecting the appropriate interface device for patients with high cervical cord injury could be considered an important part of rehabilitation. We expect the standard proposed in this study will be helpful.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

(A) SmartNav 4AT and reflector (arrow), (B) Dwell Clicking, and (C) combination of SmartNav 4AT, Dwell Clicking, and screen keyboard.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3713305&req=5

Figure 5: (A) SmartNav 4AT and reflector (arrow), (B) Dwell Clicking, and (C) combination of SmartNav 4AT, Dwell Clicking, and screen keyboard.

Mentions: There was no difficulty in moving the cursor with the Camera Mouse and webcam, but there was difficulty when selecting a function of the mouse button using MintoClick 1.0 because of the vibrating tracking point. In the case of the Head Z mouse, the vibration of the tracking point was more stable compared to the Camera Mouse and webcam, but it was difficult to use consistently as a result of dizziness and increase in fatigue induced by the need for taking frequent breaths when selecting a mouse button. It was possible to click, double click and drag stably with the SmartNav 4AT, and cursor movement was the most stable with this device, and vibration of the tracking point was the least when selecting a function of the mouse buttons through its program (Dwell Clicking; NaturalPoint) (Fig. 5B).


The selection of the appropriate computer interface device for patients with high cervical cord injury.

Kim DG, Lee BS, Lim SE, Kim DA, Hwang SI, Yim YL, Park JM - Ann Rehabil Med (2013)

(A) SmartNav 4AT and reflector (arrow), (B) Dwell Clicking, and (C) combination of SmartNav 4AT, Dwell Clicking, and screen keyboard.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3713305&req=5

Figure 5: (A) SmartNav 4AT and reflector (arrow), (B) Dwell Clicking, and (C) combination of SmartNav 4AT, Dwell Clicking, and screen keyboard.
Mentions: There was no difficulty in moving the cursor with the Camera Mouse and webcam, but there was difficulty when selecting a function of the mouse button using MintoClick 1.0 because of the vibrating tracking point. In the case of the Head Z mouse, the vibration of the tracking point was more stable compared to the Camera Mouse and webcam, but it was difficult to use consistently as a result of dizziness and increase in fatigue induced by the need for taking frequent breaths when selecting a mouse button. It was possible to click, double click and drag stably with the SmartNav 4AT, and cursor movement was the most stable with this device, and vibration of the tracking point was the least when selecting a function of the mouse buttons through its program (Dwell Clicking; NaturalPoint) (Fig. 5B).

Bottom Line: The third was a 13-year-old patient with NLI C1, ASIA-B.The IntegraMouse enabling clicking and dragging with fine movements of the lips.We expect the standard proposed in this study will be helpful.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Rehabilitation, National Rehabilitation Center, Seoul, Korea.

ABSTRACT
In order to determine the most suitable computer interfaces for patients with high cervical cord injury, we report three cases of applications of special input devices. The first was a 49-year-old patient with neurological level of injury (NLI) C4, American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (ASIA)-A. He could move the cursor by using a webcam-based Camera Mouse. Moreover, clicking the mouse could only be performed by pronation of the forearm on the modified Micro Light Switch. The second case was a 41-year-old patient with NLI C3, ASIA-A. The SmartNav 4AT which responds according to head movements could provide stable performance in clicking and dragging. The third was a 13-year-old patient with NLI C1, ASIA-B. The IntegraMouse enabling clicking and dragging with fine movements of the lips. Selecting the appropriate interface device for patients with high cervical cord injury could be considered an important part of rehabilitation. We expect the standard proposed in this study will be helpful.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus