Background: Quantification of motor performance has a promising role in personalized medicine by diagnosing and monitoring, e.g. neurodegenerative diseases or health problems related to aging. New motion assessment technologies can evolve into patient-centered eHealth applications on a global scale to support personalized healthcare as well as treatment of disease. However, uncertainty remains on the limits of generalizability of such data, which is relevant specifically for preventive or predictive applications, using normative datasets to screen for incipient disease manifestations or indicators of individual risks.
Objective: This study explored differences between healthy German and Japanese adults in the performance of a short set of six motor tests.
Methods: Six motor tasks related to gait and balance were recorded with a validated 3D camera system. Twenty-five healthy adults from Chiba, Japan, participated in this study and were matched for age, sex, and BMI to a sample of 25 healthy adults from Berlin, Germany. Recordings used the same technical setup and standard instructions and were supervised by the same experienced operator. Differences in motor performance were analyzed using multiple linear regressions models, adjusted for differences in body stature.
Results: From 23 presented parameters, five showed group-related differences after adjustment for height and weight (R-2 between .19 and .46, p<.05). Japanese adults transitioned faster between sitting and standing and used a smaller range of hand motion. In stepping-in-place, cadence was similar in both groups, but Japanese adults showed higher knee movement amplitudes. Body height was identified as relevant confounder (standardized beta >.5) for performance of short comfortable and maximum speed walks. For results of posturography, regression models did not reveal effects of group or body stature.
Conclusions: Our results support the existence of a population-specific bias in motor function patterns in young healthy adults. This needs to be considered when motor function is assessed and used for clinical decisions, especially for personalized predictive and preventive medical purposes. The bias affected only the performance of specific items and parameters and is not fully explained by population-specific ethnic differences in body stature. It may be partially explained as cultural bias related to motor habits. Observed effects were small but are expected to be larger in a non-controlled cross-cultural application of motion assessment technologies with relevance for related algorithms that are being developed and used for data processing. In sum, the interpretation of individual data should be related to appropriate population-specific or even better personalized normative values to yield its full potential and avoid misinterpretation.
