nine-hole peg Test

Nine-Hole Peg Test- Reflection
Name
Institutional Affiliation

Nine-Hole Peg Test- Reflection
Since I am right handed, the first part of the test, using my non-dominant left hand was challenging. The process with the non-dominant right hand took an average of 60 seconds for completion. During the testing time, I arranged the pegs in the holes, starting with the extreme holes to avoid interruption in the holes that were proximal to the well. Once all the nine holes were complete, I proceeded to remove the pegs starting with the holes that were closest to the well. While the nine-hole peg text is useful in assessing fine hand dexterity, its functions expand to medical applications. The test is useful in determining the severity of hand dysfunction in addition to the outcomes of treatment strategies for neurological conditions that include Parkinson’s disease (Anila et al., 2016).
The second requirement in the assessment involved a challenging task of signing my name using my non-dominant left hand for three weeks on a daily basis. As the days progressed, the muscle memory for my fine and gross motor movements contributed to gradual ability in addition to ease of signing my name. Subsequently, by the beginning of the third week, I could sign my name with relative ease. Ultimately, both tests determine the dexterity in manual skill with the inclusion of rapid coordination between fine and gross motor movements (Anila et al., 2016). Through learning, training and experience, the hand which is a receptor of environmental information and stimuli adapts to movements in different capacities.

Thus, from the gained experience, I understood and incorporated the concepts of the tests. The experience amplified my appreciation of the physiological as well as medical implications of the two test processes.
References
Anila, P., Prajakta, G. & Nikeeta, G., (2016). An investigation into normative values for fine hand dexterity and its relation with pinch and grip strength among healthy young Indian adults. Int J Med Res Health Sci. 2016, 5(6): pages 235-238