Literature DB >> 19875120

In vivo estimation of the glenohumeral joint centre by functional methods: accuracy and repeatability assessment.

Mathieu Lempereur1, Fabien Leboeuf, Sylvain Brochard, Jean Rousset, Valérie Burdin, Olivier Rémy-Néris.   

Abstract

Several algorithms have been proposed for determining the centre of rotation of ball joints. These algorithms are used rather to locate the hip joint centre. Few studies have focused on the determination of the glenohumeral joint centre. However, no studies have assessed the accuracy and repeatability of functional methods for glenohumeral joint centre. This paper aims at evaluating the accuracy and the repeatability with which the glenohumeral joint rotation centre (GHRC) can be estimated in vivo by functional methods. The reference joint centre is the glenohumeral anatomical centre obtained by medical imaging. Five functional methods were tested: the algorithm of Gamage and Lasenby (2002), bias compensated (Halvorsen, 2003), symmetrical centre of rotation estimation (Ehrig et al., 2006), normalization method (Chang and Pollard, 2007), helical axis (Woltring et al., 1985). The glenohumeral anatomical centre (GHAC) was deduced from the fitting of the humeral head. Four subjects performed three cycles of three different movements (flexion/extension, abduction/adduction and circumduction). For each test, the location of the glenohumeral joint centre was estimated by the five methods. Analyses focused on the 3D location, on the repeatability of location and on the accuracy by computing the Euclidian distance between the estimated GHRC and the GHAC. For all the methods, the error repeatability was inferior to 8.25 mm. This study showed that there are significant differences between the five functional methods. The smallest distance between the estimated joint centre and the centre of the humeral head was obtained with the method of Gamage and Lasenby (2002). Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19875120     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.09.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  5 in total

1.  Comparison of glenohumeral joint kinematics between manual wheelchair tasks and implications on the subacromial space: A biplane fluoroscopy study.

Authors:  Joseph D Mozingo; Mohsen Akbari-Shandiz; Meegan G Van Straaten; Naveen S Murthy; Beth A Schueler; David R Holmes; Cynthia H McCollough; Kristin D Zhao
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 2.368

2.  Comparison of two methods for in vivo estimation of the glenohumeral joint rotation center (GH-JRC) of the patients with shoulder hemiarthroplasty.

Authors:  Ali Asadi Nikooyan; Frans C T van der Helm; Peter Westerhoff; Friedmar Graichen; Georg Bergmann; H E J Dirkjan Veeger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  In vivo estimation of the shoulder joint center of rotation using magneto-inertial sensors: MRI-based accuracy and repeatability assessment.

Authors:  M Crabolu; D Pani; L Raffo; M Conti; P Crivelli; A Cereatti
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 2.819

4.  The centre of rotation of the shoulder complex and the effect of normalisation.

Authors:  Celia Amabile; Anthony M J Bull; Angela E Kedgley
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 2.712

5.  Scapula kinematics of pull-up techniques: Avoiding impingement risk with training changes.

Authors:  Joe A I Prinold; Anthony M J Bull
Journal:  J Sci Med Sport       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 4.319

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.