JP5709250B2 - Upper limb motor function composite diagnostic device - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to an upper limb motor function diagnostic apparatus, and more particularly to an apparatus that can objectively and quantitatively diagnose upper limb motor functions as numerical values.

  The upper limb plays an important role in the great development of human beings. However, at present, the diagnosis of the upper limb is evaluated subjectively by a manual technique by a doctor through visual observation.

  The motor function test of the upper limb is performed for cerebral cortex function, basal ganglia function, cerebellar function, brain stem function, spinal cord function, and muscle function. Cerebral function can be controlled at will and performed in the pyramidal tract. For movement paralysis such as stroke from the 19th century to today, Barre's sign is a visual indication only for visual examination of the upper limbs, so-called “pre-advanced” posture maintenance. This is done and the holding state is observed and evaluated (for example, see Non-Patent Document 1).

  In addition, the basal ganglia function of the upper limb is an involuntary motor function performed in the extrapyramidal system, and the most typical example is that the muscle becomes stiff as shown by Parkinson's disease, and tremor (also called tremor) is accompanied. There is less exercise. Muscle hardness (also referred to as tension or tonus) is mostly evaluated by a doctor's manual technique, and for medical education only, for example, the finger muscle tonus as disclosed in Patent Document 1 below is quantified. There is still no way to objectively evaluate the upper arm or wrist muscle gear stiffness that is characteristic of Parkinson's disease.

  The cerebellar functions of the upper limbs include intention tremor, softness of the muscles, repetitive alternating movements, etc., but none of them have an objective evaluation method by manual visual observation. The cerebellar function includes a finger tapping test, but it is not a method of repeatedly tapping a desk performed in clinical practice only by the button press test of Non-Patent Document 2 and Patent Document 2. The brain stem function includes essential tremor, but the objective evaluation method is only an apparatus used only for distinguishing from tremor due to Parkinson's disease described in Patent Document 3. Regarding spinal cord function of the upper limbs, there are tendon reflexes such as biceps reflexes or triceps reflexes, but this is an objective quantitative evaluation that is only evaluated by visual inspection and palpation by a doctor by manual observation. There is no law yet.

JP 2007-003620 A JP 2006-149911 A Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 2004-136074

Piercy M.M. , Hecaen H. et al. and Ajuriaguara de J. et al. , Structural axia associated with unitary cerebral region, left and right sided cases compared Brain, 83, 225-242, 1960 Ichiro Shimoyama, Satoshi Tomae, Noriaki Shinobi, Kenichi Uemura, Simplified quantification of cerebellar function by microcomputer application, Neurologia medico-chirurica, 23: 473-440, 1983

  However, the inspection method of the above document cannot be inspected unless it is restricted to a fixed posture with a fixed device, and does not conform to the currently performed doctor's technique, and the previous predecessor accumulated so far Experience is quite difficult to use and there are no devices to test for multiple upper limb motor functions. It is highly desirable to be able to quantitatively inspect multiple items using the same method of testing the predecessor's manual technique.

  Therefore, in view of the above, an object of the present invention is to provide an upper limb motor function combined cutting device capable of comprehensively performing upper limb motor functions in exactly the same manner as conventional manual examination methods.

  In order to achieve the above object, the present invention specifically adopts the following means. Attach motion detectors to left and right palms or back or fingers separately. The present invention is performed in accordance with a doctor's technique that has been performed for a long time. The Barre sign examination procedure for the upper limbs and the essential tremor at the time of this examination are examined in the same process. Reflex tests include biceps reflex, triceps reflex, brachial reflex and ulna reflex. In addition, muscle tension such as lead pipe-like rigidity and gear-like rigidity is inspected. In addition, as a cerebellar function test, a manual gyrus / extroversion test, finger tapping test, and finger nose test are performed. The signal processing is performed immediately, and the diagnosis is performed while comparing with the normal database. Specifically, the following means are employed.

  As a first means, there are two motion sensing devices that sense the motion of the left and right upper limbs.

  In this means, it is preferable that the motion sensing device can sense space in three dimensions. For this motion detection, it is desirable to detect a plurality of positions in spatial coordinates such as position, acceleration, angular velocity, altitude altitude, and azimuth.

  In this means, it is preferable that the apparatus includes a propagation device for directly transmitting and transmitting a signal to the information device.

  In this means, the propagation method can be wired, but wireless signal propagation is desirable.

As a second means, there is a receiving device for receiving a signal from the motion sensing device.

In this means, the propagation device can also be an analog system, but the digital system is preferred in order to avoid noise and drift.

In this means, the analog signal is preferably quantized with a sampling of 100 hertz or more.

In this means, it is preferable to quantize to a resolution of 10 bits or more.

  In this means, the receiving apparatus sends a signal to the information processing apparatus.

There is an information processing apparatus as a third means.

  In this means, it is desirable for the information processing apparatus to process signal storage and signal analysis.

Further, in this means, it is desirable to simultaneously store the audio information of the doctor and the patient, the image information, and the event signal from the foot switch or the like in the signal storage of the information processing apparatus.

  Further, in this means, it is preferable to analyze the inspection items individually for the signal processing of the information processing apparatus, starting from the event signal.

As a fourth means, there is a printing device that prints the analysis result and the diagnosis result.

  By the above means, a comprehensive set of multiple items of the upper limb motor function test can be quantitatively processed equivalent to the technique that doctors have inspected, observed, and diagnosed manually. It is possible to provide an upper limb motor function combined diagnosis apparatus in which a reference can be set numerically.

It is the schematic of this apparatus. It is a block diagram of this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the flow of a process in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the flow of a test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the flow of the Barre symptom test | inspection technique of the test | inspection upper limb in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the flow of the reflection test of a test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the flow of the cerebellar function test | inspection of a test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows installation of the motion detection apparatus of the test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the Barre symptom test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the biceps reflex test in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the triceps reflex test in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the rib inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the ulna test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the muscle tension test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the repetition alternating motion test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the finger tapping test | inspection in this apparatus. It is a figure which shows the Example of the finger nose test | inspection in this apparatus.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

  FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of an upper limb motor function combined diagnosis apparatus (hereinafter referred to as “this apparatus”) according to the present embodiment. As shown in FIG. 1, the motion sensing devices 1 and 2 according to the present embodiment include a signal receiving device 5 connected to or built in the information processing device 4, and a printing device 7 connected to the information processing device 4. It is comprised. It is also desirable that the input device 6 and the display device 3 are integrated with the information processing device 4 and configured as an input unit and a display unit as part of the information processing device. This apparatus can perform the upper limb motor function diagnosis objectively and quantitatively in a complex manner by combining the above-described apparatuses under the information processing apparatus 4.

  The information processing device 4 is connected to the input device 6, the display device 3, and the printing device 7. The information processing device 4 displays various information on the display device 3 and displays signals from the motion sensing device and analysis results. . Specific operation and configuration will be described later.

  An input device 6 is connected to the information processing apparatus 4 and accepts a request for starting or stopping an upper limb motor function test or an upper limb motor function diagnosis (hereinafter also simply referred to as “diagnosis”). The input device 6 corresponds to a keyboard, a mouse, a card reader, various wired or wireless information reading devices, and the like.

  The display device 3 is connected to the information processing device 4 and displays various instructions to be given to a person who wants to make a diagnosis (hereinafter simply referred to as “diagnostic subject”). It is also desirable that the information processing device 4 has a voice guide function simultaneously with display on the display device. As these various instructions, instructions for examination to a diagnosis subject correspond. As a specific example of the display device 3, a commercially available display device can be used.

  The printing device 7 is connected to the information processing device 4 and prints and displays the result of diagnosis on a medium such as paper. Commercially available printers are widely applicable as this printing apparatus. Further, the printing device 7 can be omitted as a configuration requirement when it is determined that only the display by the display unit 3 is sufficient.

  Next, the operation of this apparatus will be described. FIG. 2 shows a block diagram focusing on the information processing apparatus 4 of the present apparatus.

  As shown in FIG. 2, the information processing apparatus 4 in this apparatus includes an input device 6 that receives information input from a person to be diagnosed, an operation system, a program for analysis, a program for diagnosis, a database serving as a reference for diagnosis, A storage device 404 that stores the measurement results of the person to be diagnosed, a CPU 402 that performs calculations, a RAM 403 that functions as a recording medium and enables high-speed processing and real-time reporting, a display device 3, and a printing device 7. Configured.

  Next, the measurement using this apparatus is demonstrated using the flow of FIG. This flow shows an outline of steps executed after a program stored in the storage device 404 of the information processing apparatus 4 (hereinafter also referred to as “this program”) is read into the RAM 403.

  This program accepts an input from the input device 3 and starts processing. First, an attribute of a person to be diagnosed is input (step 01, hereinafter referred to as “S01”). Note that various data can be adopted as the attribute here, and for example, name, age, gender, dominant hand, weight, height, and the like are applicable. The dominant hand is self-application information, and there are multiple items such as "hands using chopsticks" "hands writing" "hands brushing teeth" "hands using a lot of hair brushes or combs" "hands often using shaving" " For example, “hands used frequently for makeup”. The received attribute information is stored in the RAM 403 or a partial area of the storage device 404 as attribute data.

  Here, the information stored in the storage device is divided into multiple parts, which are divided into personal information parts such as name and age, information parts obtained with this device, information obtained through medical care, etc., and security is strictly controlled There are other parts, that is, upper limb motor function information obtained from this device, CT, MRI, nuclear medicine examination, and questionnaire information, etc. that were performed in the past medical care. It is necessary to input this, and if it is not input, it belongs to personal information, and security is strictly controlled. A medical person's evaluation is input to this flag, and the presence or absence of higher cerebral dysfunction is input. When there is a failure, the diagnosis name, the failure site, and the like are applicable.

  Next, the program performs motion signal input (see FIG. 3 again, S02) by controlling the motion sensing devices 1 and 2 connected to the information processing device 4.

  Next, the program performs an analysis process using a processing algorithm that is stored in the RAM 403 of the information processing apparatus 4 (see FIG. 3, S03).

Next, this program performs a diagnostic process using a processing algorithm that is stored in the RAM 403 of the information processing apparatus 4 (see FIG. 3, S04).
The diagnosis here is performed in comparison with the accumulated database S05.

  Then, after performing analysis and diagnosis processing, the diagnosis result is displayed on the display device 3 (S06) and simultaneously printed on the printing device 7 (S07). It is determined whether or not the necessary diagnosis processing has been completed (S08). If it has been completed, the termination processing is performed. If the examination is necessary again, the procedure returns to data input (S02) for diagnosis. In this process, it is useful to output a detailed result of the item to the printing device at a later date so as to be useful when the subject to be diagnosed receives a diagnosis by a specialist doctor for an item determined to require reexamination.

  Next, the signal input (S02) will be described with reference to FIGS. 4, 5, 6, and 7. FIG.

  FIG. 4 shows an overall view of the inspection. In the first step S0201, Barre sign test is performed. In the next step S0202, a reflection inspection is performed. In the next step S0203, a muscle tone inspection is performed. In the next step S0204, a cerebellar function test is performed. The step order of the four steps S0201 to S0204 here is not absolute, and may be freely changed depending on the convenience of the examiner and the condition of the person to be diagnosed, and there may be steps that are not examined.

  FIG. 5 shows that the Barre symptom test can simultaneously test two tests of the upper limb motor paralysis test S020101 and the tremor test S020102. The Barre symptom test is a test in which a person who is diagnosed in a sitting position or standing position maintains a so-called “previous position” for a certain period of time with closed eyes. For example, about 5 to 30 seconds is preferable. If it does not move even after about 5 seconds, the person who performs the examination may push the upper arm of the person to be diagnosed lightly about 2-3 times.

  FIG. 6 shows the steps of the reflection inspection S0202. In the first step S020201, a biceps reflex examination is performed. In the next step S020202, a triceps reflex examination is performed. In the next step S020203, an arm rib examination is performed. In the next step S020204, an ulna reflex examination is performed. For biceps reflexes, the tendon of the elbow is gently tapped at a constant speed with a diagnostic hammer, but it may be directly hit with a hammer, but it is also preferable to tap with a doctor's finger. Further, it is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. The triceps reflex is a diagnostic hammer that taps the triceps tendon of the elbow at a constant speed, but it may be directly hit with a hammer or a doctor's finger. Further, it is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times.

  For the calcaneus reflex, a hammer is used to tap the rib head of the wrist lightly at a constant speed. It is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. For ulnar reflex, tap the ulna head of the wrist lightly at a constant speed with a diagnostic hammer. It is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. The order of the four steps S0201 to S0204 here is not absolute and can be freely changed depending on the convenience of the examiner and the condition of the person to be diagnosed, and the examination items may be omitted and the next step may be performed. Is possible.

  FIG. 7 shows the steps of the cerebellar function test S0204. In the first step S020401, a repetitive alternating motion test is performed. In the next step S020402, a finger tapping inspection is performed. In the next step S020403, finger nose examination is performed. In repetitive alternating movements, the person to be diagnosed raises both hands to a horizontal position and asks the doctor to face the palm. At this time, it is preferable that doctors also set examples in the same position. Next, the palm is repeatedly rotated around the wrist (also referred to as pronation or pronation) and examined. At this time, it is preferable that the doctor shows a model and imitates it. In the finger tapping inspection in step S020402, the top surface of a familiar desk is repeatedly tapped regularly and as quickly as possible with the index finger separately on the left and right. If there is no desk, it can be the knee of the person being diagnosed or the other hand. The inspection time is preferably about 3 to 15 seconds. It is preferable that the doctor give a model before this examination. In the finger nose examination in step S020403, the diagnosis subject touches the tip of the nose of the diagnosis subject with the index finger, and then touches the doctor's index finger placed 30 cm to 50 cm in front of the diagnosis subject. This reciprocation is preferably repeated 5 times. It is also desirable to make a round trip as quickly as possible or as slow as possible. This test is done with separate left and right fingers. The order of the three steps S020401 to S020403 here is not absolute, and can be freely changed depending on the convenience of the examiner and the condition of the person to be diagnosed, and the examination items may be omitted and the next step may be performed. Is possible.

  Next, analysis diagnostic methods will be described with examples.

  The part where the motion sensing device is installed on the left and right upper limbs will be described. Depending on the size of the motion sensing device, it may be desirable to place it on the palm of your hand as shown on the left in FIG. It is also preferable to install it on the back part symmetrically as shown in the right figure of FIG. Furthermore, it is also preferable to install a small motion sensing device with a side of several millimeters in a contrasting position between the left and right fingers on the back of the index finger.

  A diagnosis subject who does not have an abnormality does not show a decrease without losing gravity by holding a “previous” posture of the left and right upper limbs for a certain period by Barre sign examination of the upper limbs. Diagnosis subjects who have paralysis of the upper limbs fall without being able to resist gravity. Although it may occur even when the eyes are opened, it is preferable to have the eyes closed because it is possible to correct the lowering of the upper limbs with the eyes. Decrease value per hour is determined, but the unit and resolution are diagnosed from 95% confidence interval equivalent to the age of the database of the diagnosis target without abnormality, depending on the unit and sensitivity output by the motion sensing device. Units and resolutions that are possible are preferred.

  FIG. 9 shows an example of Barre sign test. For example, milligravity acceleration or altitude in millimeters is preferable. In some cases, both upper limbs drop, but during stroke, the paralysis of one of the upper limbs is almost all, so the difference between the left and right is a more important criterion than the decrease in absolute value. For example, when a 79-year-old collaborator participated and examined with a motion sensing device that senses gravitational acceleration, the left upper limb showed 2.2 mm gravitational acceleration / second after 30 seconds of actual measurement. Showed 33.4 milligravity acceleration / second.

  In this test, even if there is no lowering of the upper limb in the “previous” position, it can also detect shaking and shaking of the upper limb, and if it can detect shaking or shaking that deviates from the physiological range of healthy individuals, Diagnose wars. Analyzing methods include least square error, variance value, spectral analysis, power value of signal per time of component obtained by removing bias and removing shift component obtained by primary regression line, that is, square integral value, etc. However, for example, when a 79-year-old woman participates in cooperation and examines with a motion sensing device that senses gravitational acceleration, the dispersion of the left upper limb is 2401.1 millimeters of gravitational acceleration squared / second measured for 30 seconds. The upper right limb showed 1547.7 millimeters of gravity acceleration squared / second.

  Next, an analysis and diagnosis method for biceps reflex in the reflex test will be described with examples.

  FIG. 10 shows an embodiment of the method for analysis and analysis of biceps reflexes. The doctor holds the elbow to be examined by the person to be diagnosed lightly and instructs the person to be diagnosed to remove power. Tap the doctor's thumb on the biceps tendon with a medical hammer. This inspection is preferably repeated a plurality of times. It is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. The motion signal obtained by this biceps reflex is shown in the portion surrounded by the square in the right graph of FIG. The analysis method preferably uses an average of a plurality of changes from tapping. For example. It is preferable to use a reaction amount normalized by a direct momentum by tapping. It is preferable to use the response time peak latency, amplitude, or integrated value. In the example, the direct response of the left biceps reflex using acceleration was 0.86, the amplitude of the tendon reflex was 0.05, and the latency was 230 milliseconds. In the right biceps reflex, the direct response was 0.45, the tendon reflex amplitude was 0.09, and the latency was 80 milliseconds.

  FIG. 11 shows an example of an implementation analysis diagnostic method for triceps reflex. The doctor holds the elbow to be examined by the person to be diagnosed lightly and instructs the person to be diagnosed to remove power. Tap the doctor's index finger or middle finger on the triceps tendon with a diagnostic hammer. This inspection is preferably repeated a plurality of times. It is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. The motion signal obtained by this triceps reflex is shown in the portion surrounded by the square in the right graph of FIG. The analysis method preferably uses an average of a plurality of changes from tapping. For example, it is preferable to use a reaction amount normalized by a direct momentum by tapping. It is preferable to use the response time peak latency, amplitude, or integrated value. In the example, the direct response of the left triceps reflex using acceleration was 0.62, the amplitude of the tendon reflex was 0.05, and the latency was 210 milliseconds. In the right triceps reflex, the direct response was 0.43, the amplitude of the tendon reflex was 0.09, and the latency was 60 milliseconds.

  FIG. 12 shows an example of an implementation analysis diagnostic method for brachial reflexes. The doctor holds the elbow to be examined by the person to be diagnosed lightly and instructs the person to be diagnosed to remove power. Tap the rib head of the person to be examined lightly with an examination hammer. This inspection is preferably repeated a plurality of times. It is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. The motion signal obtained by this arm rib reflex is shown in the portion surrounded by the square in the right graph of FIG. The analysis method preferably uses an average of a plurality of changes from tapping. For example, it is preferable to use a reaction amount normalized by a direct momentum by tapping. It is preferable to use the response time peak latency, amplitude, or integrated value. In the example, the direct response of the left arm rib reflex using acceleration was 1.59, the amplitude of the subsequent reflex was 0.32, and the latency was 70 milliseconds. In the right arm rib reflex, the direct response was 0.73, the amplitude of the subsequent reflex was 0.14, and the latency was 70 milliseconds.

  FIG. 13 shows an example of an implementation analysis diagnostic method for ulnar reflexes. The doctor holds the elbow to be examined by the person to be diagnosed lightly and instructs the person to be diagnosed to remove power. Tap the head of the subject's ulna with a hammer for examination. This inspection is preferably repeated a plurality of times. It is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. The motion signal obtained by this ulnar reflex is shown in the portion surrounded by the square in the right graph of FIG. The analysis method preferably uses an average of a plurality of changes from tapping. For example, it is preferable to use a reaction amount normalized by a direct momentum by tapping. It is preferable to use the latency of the peak of the reaction amount, the amplitude, or the integrated value of the amplitude. In the example, using the acceleration, the direct response of the left ulnar reflex was 0.65, the amplitude of the subsequent reflex was 0.21, and the latency was 80 milliseconds. For the right ulnar reflex, the direct response was 0.80, the amplitude of the subsequent reflex was 0.20, and the latency was 80 milliseconds.

  FIG. 14 shows an example of an analysis analysis method for performing a muscle tone test. The doctor gently holds the elbow to be examined by the diagnosis subject with one hand, holds the wrist of the diagnosis subject with the other hand of the doctor, and instructs the diagnosis subject to relieve power. The doctor moves the wrist of the subject to be examined and exercises flexion and extension of the elbow part rhythmically. The frequency is preferably around 1 hertz. This bending / extending movement is preferably repeated a plurality of times. For example, it is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. The movement signal obtained by this muscle tension test is shown in the right graph of FIG. The upper graph shows the signal of the upper left limb, and the lower graph shows the signal from the upper right limb. It is preferable that the analysis method is standardized by the bending extension frequency of the doctor and obtains a peak with a frequency faster than the bending extension frequency. In the example, the left upper limb was 0.19 and the right upper limb was 0.18 using motion sensing by acceleration.

  FIG. 15 shows an embodiment of an analysis analysis method for performing the repeated alternating motion test. In repetitive alternating movements, the person to be diagnosed is in a “previous” position, that is, both hands are raised to a horizontal position, and the faced doctor is in a position to show the palm. At this time, it is preferable that doctors also set examples in the same position. Next, the wrist is repeatedly rotated around the wrist (also referred to as pronation / pronation) and examined. It is preferable that the pronation / extraction be tried multiple times. For example, it is preferable to repeat 3 to 6 times. At this time, it is preferable that the doctor shows a model and imitates it. A signal in which the rotational acceleration about the wrist is recorded is the right graph of FIG. The upper left limb is shown in the upper graph, and the upper right limb is shown in the lower graph. In the analysis, for example, since the movement of the right and left upper limbs is symmetric in a healthy person, the correlation coefficient is -0.82.

  FIG. 16 shows an embodiment of an analysis analysis method for finger tapping inspection. In the finger tapping test, a diagnosis target person puts out only one index finger, and the tip of the finger is repeatedly struck as quickly as possible for a certain period of time on a horizontal surface such as a desk. For example, it is preferable to repeatedly hit for 3 to 15 seconds. In this examination, it is preferable that the wrist be struck without being fixed to the desk. It is preferable to inspect the left and right hands separately. As an analysis method, it is preferable to analyze the acceleration with the axis closest to the direction of the tapping motion of the index finger. The upper part of the right graph in FIG. 16 shows the signal from the left hand, and the lower part of the right graph in FIG. 16 shows the signal result from the right hand. In the analysis, for example, the frequency of the tapping interval was an average value of 4.7 times / second in the left upper limb examination, the standard deviation was 15.4, and the coefficient of variation was 328%. The average value of the frequency of tapping intervals in the right upper limb examination was 5. The standard deviation was 15.4 at 1 time / second, and the coefficient of variation was 302%. Regarding the tapping strength, the average value was 12.0 mm gravity acceleration / second in the left upper limb examination, the standard deviation was 5.0, and the coefficient of variation was 42%. In the upper right limb test for the hitting strength, the average value was 11.3 mm gravity acceleration / second, the standard deviation was 5.2, and the coefficient of variation was 46%.

  FIG. 17 shows an embodiment of an analysis method for analysis of finger nose examination. In the finger nose examination, the diagnosis subject raises the index finger to the height of the face, touches the tip of the subject's own nose, and then touches the doctor's index finger placed 30 cm to 50 cm in front of the diagnosis subject. This reciprocation is preferably repeated 5 times. It is also desirable to go back and forth as quickly as possible and to go back and forth as slowly as possible. This test is done with separate left and right fingers. The upper part of the right graph in FIG. 17 shows the signal from the left upper limb, and the lower part of the right graph in FIG. 17 shows the signal result from the upper right limb. In the analysis, for example, it is preferable to determine the shaking of the hand to be inspected from side to side. For example, if 5 round trips are made, a shaking component of 5 cycles or more in a period of 5 round trips when the patient's nose and the fingertip of the doctor are touched can be regarded as tremor. For example, spectrum analysis was performed for five periods and normalized by a power value of five periods, and the peak of five periods or more showed 0.007 for the left hand and 0.012 for the right hand.

  As described above, according to the present embodiment, the upper limb motor function composite diagnostic apparatus can provide an upper limb motor function composite diagnostic apparatus that can quantitatively comprehensively diagnose a plurality of upper limb motor functions objectively as numerical values.

  The present invention can be used in an industrial field as a diagnostic apparatus for combining upper limb motor functions.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... Motion sensing device for right hand, 2 ... Motion sensing device for left hand, 3 ... Display device, 4 ... Information processing device, 5 ... Signal receiving device, 6 ... Input device, 7 ... Printing device, 401 ... I / O, 402 ... CPU, 403 ... RAM, 404 ... storage device, 405 ... display device, 406 ... storage device

Claims (2)

A motion sensing device including two sensors for sensing the spatial position of the left and right upper limbs in three-dimensional spatial coordinates;
An information processing device connected to the motion sensing device and receiving a signal from the sensor of the motion sensing device to perform a quantitative analysis;
An input device connected to the information processing device and outputting an input signal to the information processing device;
A display device for displaying the result of the quantitative analysis of the information processing device, and an upper limb motor function composite diagnostic device,
Quantitative analysis performed by the information processing apparatus includes Barre symptom testing performed by determining at least one of the lowering of the upper limb per unit time, shaking and shaking and comparing it with a database, and tapping a predetermined position of the upper limb. Reflex test to determine the amount of response of the upper limb based on the above, repetitive alternating motion test to record the rotational acceleration around the left and right wrists and confirm the target of the motion of the left and right upper limbs, and the nasal tip and front of the subject's own An upper limb motor function composite diagnosis device including at least one of nasal finger inspections performed by extracting a shaking component by reciprocating a finger between points at a predetermined distance from the point .   The upper limb motor function composite diagnostic device according to claim 1, further comprising: a printing device that prints a result of the quantitative analysis.