JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
The Effect of Hand Function Training on Hand Dexterity
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
The Effect of Hand Function Training on Hand Dexterity
Jang, Chel; Lee, Jeyoung; Song, Minok;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Purpose : The purpose of this study was to provide the material about the treatment effect of hand function training and writing training being performed as a part of treatment to improve the function of the non-dominant hand of the patients whose dominant hand is damaged and thus need to improve their non-dominant hand`s function. Method : During one month of November, 2013, this study randomly chose five study subjects for hand function training, five for writing training, and ten of control group from 20 normal male and female adults going to K Univ. in Busan. All study subjects fully understood all of the training course, agreed to take the test in this study, and volunteered to participate in the test. Each training was performed five times for two weeks, 30 minutes each time. For measurement, Purdue pegboard was used to look into the change of hand dexterity. To investigate an improvement in hand function through hand function training and writing training, this study conducted early evaluation before training, interim evaluation, and final evaluation. Result : First, according to the comparison of dominant hand dexterity by group and by method during a training period, the groups of hand function training and of writing training improved dominant hand dexterity more than the control group. Secondly, according to the comparison of non-dominant hand dexterity by group during a training period, the groups of hand function training and of writing training improved dexterity more than the control group. According to the comparison of non-dominant hand dexterity by method during a training period, there was no big difference in dexterity between the groups of hand function training and of writing training and the control group. But, the group of hand function training showed a further improvement. Thirdly, according to the comparison of both-hand dexterity by group and by method during a training period, the groups of hand function training and of writing training improved both-hand dexterity more than the control group. Fourthly, according to the comparison of both-hand handling ability by group and by method during a training period, the groups of hand function training and of writing training improved both-hand handling ability more than the control group. Conclusion : Given the study result, it is considered that hand function training and writing training help brain damaged patients improve their hand function for their daily activity. And it will be meaningful to research brain damaged patients` motor skills after their brain damage, and the patients who have low abilities of visual perception and cognition. In the future, it will be necessary to secure more study subjects and perform systematic training during a sufficient test period.
 Keywords
hand function training;writing training;hand dexterity;hand manipulation;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
공미희(2009). 성인 뇌손상 환자의 쓰기 훈련이 손기능에 미치는 효과. 동신대학교 대학원, 석사학위 논문.

2.
김연희 등(1993). 타자기 사용 유무에 따른 손의 기민성과 장악력에 관한 비교 분석. 대한작업치료학회지, 1(1), 3-10.

3.
김윤태 등(1994). 연령에 따른 장악력과 손의 기민성평가. 대한재활의학협회지, 18(4), 780-788.

4.
김진호, 한태륜(2002). 재활의학. 서울, 군자출판사.

5.
김희영(2008). 노인의 손 기능 및 장악력과 도구적 일상생활활동의 독립성과의 관계. 치매작업치료학회지, 2(2), 1-12.

6.
박은정 등(2005). 휴대전화기 문자 쓰는 속도와 손의 민첩성과의 상관관계. 대한작업치료학회지, 13(3), 59-67.

7.
이상헌, 정민예(2002). 20대 정상인의 Complete Minnets ota Dexterity Test 표준 자료. 대한작업치료학회지, 10(2), 119-126.

8.
이택영 등(1999). 뇌졸중 환자의 환측 상지 기능이 건측손의 기민성에 미치는 영향. 대한작업치료학회지, 7(1), 56-67.

9.
Agnew PJ, Mass F(1982). Hand function related age and sex. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 63, 269-271.

10.
Backmen C, Mackie H, Harris T(1991). Arthritis hand function test: development of a standardized assessment tool. Occup Ther J Res, 11, 245-255.

11.
Desrosiers J, Bravo G, Hebert R, et al(1994). Validation of the box and block test as a measure of dexterity of elderly people: reliability, validity, and norms. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 75(7), 751-755.

12.
Exner CE(1990). In-hand manipulation skills in normal young children: a pilot study. Occup Ther Practice, 1, 63-72.

13.
Exner CE(1996). Development of hand skills. In j.C. Smith, A. S. Allen, & P. N. Pratt (Eds), Occupational therapy for children (3rd ed., 1996;268-306). St. Louis, Mosby.

14.
Falconer J, Hugues SL, Naughton Bj, et al(1991). Self report and performance-based hand function as correlates of dependency in the elderly. J Am Geriatric Soc, 39, 695-699. crossref(new window)

15.
Farber SD(1991). Assessing neuromotor performance enablers. Occupational Therapy: overcoming human performance deficits. Now Jersey, slack, pp.512.

16.
Gallahue DL(1968). The relationship between perceptual and motor abilities. Res Quately, 39, 948-951.

17.
Mandell Rj, Nelson DL, Cermark SA(1984). Differential laterality of hand function in right-handed and left-handed boys. Am J Occup Ther, 38, 114-120. crossref(new window)

18.
Mathiowetzs V, Volland G, Kashman N, et al(1985). Adult norms for the box and block test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther, 39, 386-391. crossref(new window)

19.
Melvin JL(1985). Roles and functions of occupational therapy in hand rehabilitation. Am J Occup Ther, 39(12), 795-798. crossref(new window)

20.
Super D(1949). Appraising vocational fitness. New York, Harper.

21.
Thrombly CA(1989). Occupational therapy for physical dysfunction. 3rd ed, Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, pp.512-530.