Literature DB >> 27266886

Reliability of a Qualitative Video Analysis for Running.

Andrew Pipkin, Kristy Kotecki, Scott Hetzel, Bryan Heiderscheit.   

Abstract

Study Design Reliability study. Background Video analysis of running gait is frequently performed in orthopaedic and sports medicine practices to assess biomechanical factors that may contribute to injury. However, the reliability of a whole-body assessment has not been determined. Objective To determine the intrarater and interrater reliability of the qualitative assessment of specific running kinematics from a 2-dimensional video. Methods Running-gait analysis was performed on videos recorded from 15 individuals (8 male, 7 female) running at a self-selected pace (3.17 ± 0.40 m/s, 8:28 ± 1:04 min/mi) using a high-speed camera (120 frames per second). These videos were independently rated on 2 occasions by 3 experienced physical therapists using a standardized qualitative assessment. Fifteen sagittal and frontal plane kinematic variables were rated on a 3- or 5-point categorical scale at specific events of the gait cycle, including initial contact (n = 3) and midstance (n = 9), or across the full gait cycle (n = 3). The video frame number corresponding to each gait event was also recorded. Intrarater and interrater reliability values were calculated for gait-event detection (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] and standard error of measurement [SEM]) and the individual kinematic variables (weighted kappa [κw]). Results Gait-event detection was highly reproducible within raters (ICC = 0.94-1.00; SEM, 0.3-1.0 frames) and between raters (ICC = 0.77-1.00; SEM, 0.4-1.9 frames). Eleven of the 15 kinematic variables demonstrated substantial (κw = 0.60-0.799) or excellent (κw>0.80) intrarater agreement, with the exception of foot-to-center-of-mass position (κw = 0.59), forefoot position (κw = 0.58), ankle dorsiflexion at midstance (κw = 0.49), and center-of-mass vertical excursion (κw = 0.36). Interrater agreement for the kinematic measures varied more widely (κw = 0.00-0.85), with 5 variables showing substantial or excellent reliability. Conclusion The qualitative assessment of specific kinematic measures during running can be reliably performed with the use of a high-speed video camera. Detection of specific gait events was highly reproducible, as were common kinematic variables such as rearfoot position, foot-strike pattern, tibial inclination angle, knee flexion angle, and forward trunk lean. Other variables should be used with caution. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(7):556-561. Epub 6 Jun 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6280.

Keywords:  gait analysis; interrater; intrarater; running assessment; running injury

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27266886     DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2016.6280

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther        ISSN: 0190-6011            Impact factor:   4.751


  16 in total

1.  Wearables for Running Gait Analysis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Rachel Mason; Liam T Pearson; Gillian Barry; Fraser Young; Oisin Lennon; Alan Godfrey; Samuel Stuart
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2022-10-15       Impact factor: 11.928

2.  Clinical Indoor Running Gait Analysis May Not Approximate Outdoor Running Gait Based on Novel Drone Technology.

Authors:  Lindsay Lafferty; John Wawrzyniak; Morgan Chambers; Todd Pagliarulo; Arthur Berg; Nour Hawila; Matthew Silvis
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 4.355

3.  Reliability of 2-Dimensional Video Analysis in Adolescent Runners.

Authors:  Yukiko Matsuzaki; Madison R Heath; Julianne M Khan; Alexandra T Mackie; Elad Spitzer; Peter D Fabricant
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2022-03-18

4.  Development of the University of Wisconsin Running Injury and Recovery Index.

Authors:  Evan O Nelson; Michael Ryan; Erin AufderHeide; Bryan Heiderscheit
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-08-03       Impact factor: 4.751

5.  Validity and Reliability of 2-Dimensional Video-Based Assessment to Analyze Foot Strike Pattern and Step Rate During Running: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Fábio Carlos Lucas de Oliveira; Anny Fredette; Sherezada Ochoa Echeverría; Charles Sebiyo Batcho; Jean-Sébastien Roy
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 3.843

6.  RELIABILITY OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL VIDEO-BASED RUNNING GAIT ANALYSIS.

Authors:  Mark F Reinking; Leigh Dugan; Nolan Ripple; Karen Schleper; Henry Scholz; Jesse Spadino; Cameron Stahl; Thomas G McPoil
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2018-06

7.  CLINICAL DECISION MAKING AND TREATMENT IN A RUNNER WITH HIP PAIN AND NEUROMUSCULAR CONTROL DYSFUNCTION: A CASE REPORT.

Authors:  C Nathan Vannatta; Matthew Haberl
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2018-04

8.  HIP AND PELVIC STABILITY AND GAIT RETRAINING IN THE MANAGEMENT OF ATHLETIC PUBALGIA AND HIP LABRAL PATHOLOGY IN A FEMALE RUNNER: A CASE REPORT.

Authors:  Megan W Moran; Katherine R Rogowski
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2020-12

9.  Effects of gait retraining with focus on impact versus gait retraining with focus on cadence on pain, function and lower limb kinematics in runners with patellofemoral pain: Protocol of a randomized, blinded, parallel group trial with 6-month follow-up.

Authors:  José Roberto de Souza Júnior; Pedro Henrique Reis Rabelo; Thiago Vilela Lemos; Jean-Francois Esculier; João Pedro da Silva Carto; João Paulo Chieregato Matheus
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Level of Agreement, Reliability, and Minimal Detectable Change of the MusclelabTM Laser Speed Device on Force-Velocity-Power Sprint Profiles in Division II Collegiate Athletes.

Authors:  Jamie J Ghigiarelli; Keith J Ferrara; Kevin M Poblete; Carl F Valle; Adam M Gonzalez; Katie M Sell
Journal:  Sports (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.