BME100 f2017:Group4 W1030 L3

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
BME 100 Fall 2017 Home
Lab Write-Up 1 | Lab Write-Up 2 | Lab Write-Up 3
Lab Write-Up 4 | Lab Write-Up 5 | Lab Write-Up 6
Course Logistics For Instructors
Wiki Editing Help


Name: Quentin Ellis
Name: Jacob Schuler
Name: Nazima Ansari
Name: Ryan Dougherty
Name: Alexis Chavez


Evaluating the Spree Monitoring Device

Descriptive Statistics

Heart Rate:

Mean for Spree: 98.95

Mean for Gold Standard: 98.09

Pearson's R: .6908


Mean for Spree: 95.45

Mean for Gold Standard: 96.65

Pearson's R: .1879

Inferential Statistics

Heart Rate:

T-Test: .4271


T-Test: 2.84*10^-24


Summary of Results

According to the results of our analysis, the spree headband measures up remarkably well to the Golden Standard, and helps reinforce the claim that the Spree headband can perform the same measurements. Now, there are some statistical interests, in that several of the recorded values were without pair or at 0, an they were unexplained. These were accounted for in our calculations, but it should be pointed out none the less.

Experiment Design for our Device

Lower Arm Prosthetic: Variable being tested-Range of Grip Strength. The rationale behind this is that objects will have a certain material strength. To pick up the widest variety of objects a prosthetic will need the ability to apply different forces. To be tested against the gold standard of inexpensive functional prosthetic arms, The Split Hook. The rationale behind this is that the split hook design is both the most common and most inexpensive functional prosthetic arm design.

Sample Size: 50 individuals with dominant side, below the elbow amputations. The rationale behind this is that the dominant side will inherently have more skill in being used. This eliminated having to filter a test group so that only right handed people with right arm amputations.

A pressure sensor strip is placed in a circle around a cylindrical object of 2.5 inches in diameter. First, each amputee will put on the Split Hook lower arm prosthesis. Each individual will be ask to use their prosthesis to grasp the object with the most force as possible and then pick it up. Each individual will be asked to repeat this process successfully three times. Each time the data will be recorded. Then they will be asked to grasp that same object with as little force as possible, while still picking it up. They will be asked to do this successfully three times. Then the 50 individuals will then put on our compression based prosthesis. They will be given the same task to perform under the same guidelines as the previous test.

The same sample group will be useful because it ensure the people are of equal strength. The "practicing" factor is not an issue because the two arms require different motions to be used and thus repeating a motion with one prosthesis will have no effect on how capable someone is with the other.

Inferential statistics will not be necessary here because the gold standard only operates at a certain range of pressures. These can be easily exceeded or under achieved. The comparison method we will be using is range. The larger the range the more useful the prosthetic is.