Motion Measurement and Analysis for Functional Independence Measure
Shino Matsuura*,, Kazuhiko Hirata*, Hiroaki Kimura*, Yoshitaka Iwamoto* , Makoto Takahashi* , Yui Endo** , Mitsunori Tada** , Tsubasa Maruyama** , and Yuichi Kurita*
1-4-1 Kagamiyama, Higashihiroshima-shi, Hiroshima 739-8527, Japan
**National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)
An appropriate physical functionality status assessment is necessary after rehabilitation to determine the level of assistance required by the patient and the efficacy of rehabilitation. The effectiveness of rehabilitation can be determined by computing a functional independence measure (FIM) score. The FIM score measurement process evaluates the amount of assistance associated with activities of daily living; however, it is influenced by evaluator subjectivity and can vary for the same patient assessed by different evaluators. Furthermore, it is time-consuming and laborious because of the large number of component items. Therefore, a new evaluation system that is easily implementable and based on objective criteria is needed. Several machine learning techniques have been suggested for evaluating the progress of rehabilitation in an objective manner, and their efficacy has been proven. However, the FIM score includes complex movement items, necessitating the evaluation of factors from multiple angles. In this study, a method for estimating FIM values using machine learning was investigated to evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation objectively. A simple exercise measurement experiment was conducted, and a musculoskeletal model was used to analyze the data to obtain movement and other mechanical indices, and these were subsequently used as features of machine learning. Based on the FIM values, an estimation experiment was conducted in three groups: independent, modified independent, and assisted groups. The statistical approaches of random forest and logistic regression were used in conjunction with a support vector machine for FIM estimation. The highest accuracy was estimated to be approximately 0.9. However, the accuracy varied with each method and item; the lowest accuracy was approximately 0.3. Statistical analysis showed clear differences in the indicators, with significant differences between the groups. These differences were considered to increase the accuracy of FIM estimation. Additionally, the accuracy of some items was improved by changing the feature values used. The best results were obtained when only the joint angle was used for two items, joint torque and muscle strength were used for seven items, and all indicators were used for two items. This suggests that a comprehensive evaluation, including that of joint torque and muscle strength, is effective for estimating FIM score.
-  Cabinet Office, “Aging population,” White Paper on Ageing Society, Chapter 1, Section 2, 2021.
-  N. Shinami et al., “A survey on the use of evaluation methods in rehabilitation-related journals –9–,” Jpn. J. Relabel. Med., Vol.54, No.2, pp. 158-166, 2017 (in Japanese).
-  A. Osawa, S. Maeshima, and H. Arai, “Assessment of Activities of Daily Living for Older People and People with Dementia,” Jpn. J. Rehabil. Med., Vol.58, No.9, pp. 991-997, 2021.
-  T. Shiraishi et al., “ Predicting FIM gains in patients with acute cerebral haemorrhage using machine learning,” Proc. of the National Conf. of the Society for Artificial Intelligence, 34th 2020, Society for Human Know-how, 2020.
-  Y. Hara et al., “Utility of the Berg balance scale on admission in orthopaedic patients in predicting ADL independence at discharge,” Physiotherapy Supplement, Vol.46, Suppl. No.1, (53rd Annual Japanese Congress of Physiotherapy Abstracts), Japan Association of Physiotherapists (Currently Japan Federation of Physiotherapy Societies), 2019.
-  S. Miao et al., “Upper limb rehabilitation system for stroke survivors based on multi-modal sensors and machine learning,” IEEE Access, Vol.9, pp. 30283-30291, 2021.
-  L. Lu et al, “Evaluating rehabilitation progress using motion features identified by machine learning,” IEEE Trans. on Biomedical Engineering, Vol.68, No.4, pp. 1417-1428, 2020.
-  S. Das, W. Sakoda, P. Ramasamy, R. Tadayon, A. V. Ramirez, and Y. Kurita, “Feature selection and validation of a machine learning-based lower limb risk assessment tool: A feasibility study,” Sensors, Vol.21, No.19, 6459, 2021.
-  Y. Endo, M. Tada, and M. Mochimaru, “Dhaiba: development of virtual ergonomic assessment system with human models,” Proc. of the 3rd Int. Digital Human Symp., 2014.
-  K. Ayusawa and Y. Nakamura, “Fast inverse dynamics algorithm with decomposed computation of gradient for wire-driven multi-body systems and its application to estimation of human muscle tensions,” 2nd IFToMM Int. Symp. on Robotics and Mechatronics, 11, 2011.
-  Y. Kanda, “Investigation of the freely-available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics,” Bone Marrow Transplant, Vol.48, pp. 452-458, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2012.244
This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationa License.