| Literature DB >> 26076031 |
Valeriya Gritsenko1, Eric Dailey1, Nicholas Kyle1, Matt Taylor1, Sean Whittacre1, Anne K Swisher1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if a low-cost, automated motion analysis system using Microsoft Kinect could accurately measure shoulder motion and detect motion impairments in women following breast cancer surgery.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26076031 PMCID: PMC4468119 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128809
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Motion illustration and associated shoulder angles.
(A) Plot of the motion capture data from a single active abduction movement by a single subject. Lines connect body landmark coordinates on the upper body tracked by Kinect sensor in a single frame / moment in time, 30 frames per second were recorded. Black lines show trunk and head posture, red lines show right arm posture, and green lines show left arm posture. (B) Joint angle calculations illustrated on a single frame of motion capture data from the same movement as in A. Red line is a regression line through the right arm landmark coordinates; left arm landmark coordinates are removed for clarity. (C and D) Maximum joint angle measurements done using both methods described in the manuscript for abduction and flexion respectively. Circles show angles per subject averaged across 3 repetitions of the same movement; thick line is a regression. When fewer then 3 repetitions were recorded for a particular subject due to technical difficulties, the data was excluded from the analysis.
Statistics of linear relationship between goniometry and joint angles from motion capture.
| Goniometry vs. projection angle All subjects | Goniometry vs. body angle All subjects | Goniometry vs. projection angle Last 10 subjects | Goniometry vs. body angle Last 10 subjects | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| r | p | r | p | r | p | r | p | |
|
|
| 0.003 |
| 0.000 | 0.691 | 0.058 |
| 0.021 |
|
|
| 0.009 | 0.489 | 0.039 |
| 0.022 |
| 0.009 |
|
| 0.438 | 0.069 | 0.323 | 0.190 |
| 0.017 | 0.580 | 0.079 |
|
|
| 0.009 | 0.356 | 0.127 | 0.651 | 0.030 | 0.660 | 0.027 |
Significant alpha with Bonferroni correction is 0.025. Significant Pearson product moment correlation coefficients (r) are in bold; p is probability of Type I error.
Fig 2Flow diagram.
The diagram shows the sequence of subject recruitment and testing with the associated numbers of participants (n) and detection accuracy.