| Literature DB >> 30621103 |
Christina Zong-Hao Ma1,2, Yan To Ling3, Queenie Tsung Kwan Shea4, Li-Ke Wang5, Xiao-Yun Wang6, Yong-Ping Zheng7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motion capture and analyzing systems are essential for understanding locomotion. However, the existing devices are too cumbersome and can be used indoors only. A newly-developed wearable motion capture and measurement system with multiple sensors and ultrasound imaging was introduced in this study.Entities:
Keywords: electromyography (EMG); joint angle; mechanomyography (MMG); motion capture and analysis; plantar force; sonomyograph (SMG); ultrasound imaging; wearable
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30621103 PMCID: PMC6339139 DOI: 10.3390/s19010195
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1(a) An illustration of the wearable mobile sensing system with real-time ultrasound imaging and location of ultrasound probe, electromyography (EMG) electrode, mechanomyography (MMG) electrode, force sensors, and goniometer at shank and foot. (b) A demonstration of a subject wearing the wearable mobile sensing system.
Figure 2Flow chart for data processing and analysis.
Figure 3An example of user-interface (UI) of the mobiles SMG system.
Figure 4Ankle activities in a gait cycle measured by Vicon and the newly developed mobile SMG system of ten healthy subjects. P: P value; R: Pearson’s correlation coefficient; : significantly high correlation between the Vicon and mobile SMG systems; : significant changes in trend in consecutive 5% intervals; : significantly high correlation in intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) among three trials; The bolded orange line illustrates the averaged data measured by the mobile SMG system; The bolded blue line illustrates the averaged data measured by the Vicon system; The thin dashed line illustrates the standard deviation (SD) of each corresponding bold line.
Figure 5Percentage changes in muscle area in a gait cycle measured by the newly developed mobile SMG system of ten healthy subjects. : significant changes in trend in consecutive 5% intervals; : significantly high correlation in the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) among three trials.
Statistical results of reproducibility of the mobile SMG device during a gait cycle of ten healthy subjects.
| Gait Cycle | % Muscle Area | MMG | In-/E-Version | Plantar-/Dorsi-Flexion | EMG_ Plantarflexor | EMG_ Dorsiflexor | Plantar Force | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | ICC | ICC | ICC | ICC | ICC | ICC | ICC | |||||||
| 0 | NA | NA | −0.017 | 0.484 | 0.761 | 0.003 | 0.647 | 0.013 | 0.427 | 0.074 | 0.712 | 0.006 | NA | NA |
| 5 | 0.041 | 0.415 | 0.321 | 0.134 | 0.711 | 0.006 | 0.524 | 0.038 | 0.662 | 0.011 | 0.84 | 0.001 | 0.919 | <0.001 |
| 10 | −0.496 | 0.983 | 0.803 | 0.001 | 0.655 | 0.011 | 0.522 | 0.038 | 0.754 | 0.003 | 0.623 | 0.016 | 0.988 | <0.001 |
| 15 | 0.195 | 0.221 | 0.456 | 0.061 | 0.709 | 0.006 | 0.432 | 0.072 | 0.408 | 0.083 | 0.347 | 0.117 | 0.913 | <0.001 |
| 20 | −0.243 | 0.747 | 0.81 | 0.001 | 0.561 | 0.028 | 0.258 | 0.181 | 0.744 | 0.004 | 0.386 | 0.094 | 0.524 | 0.038 |
| 25 | −0.448 | 0.999 | 0.667 | 0.01 | 0.501 | 0.045 | 0.4 | 0.087 | 0.831 | 0.001 | 0.889 | <0.001 | 0.471 | 0.056 |
| 30 | −0.249 | 0.806 | 0.589 | 0.022 | 0.54 | 0.033 | 0.487 | 0.05 | 0.877 | <0.001 | 0.695 | 0.007 | 0.768 | 0.002 |
| 35 | 0.512 | 0.027 | 0.731 | 0.004 | 0.653 | 0.012 | 0.621 | 0.016 | 0.978 | <0.001 | 0.737 | 0.004 | 0.915 | <0.001 |
| 40 | 0.521 | 0.041 | 0.529 | 0.036 | 0.828 | 0.001 | 0.775 | 0.002 | 0.413 | 0.081 | 0.592 | 0.021 | 0.799 | 0.001 |
| 45 | 0.499 | 0.042 | 0.316 | 0.138 | 0.885 | <0.001 | 0.741 | 0.004 | −0.204 | 0.742 | 0.816 | 0.001 | 0.803 | 0.001 |
| 50 | 0.378 | 0.087 | 0.359 | 0.11 | 0.868 | <0.001 | 0.548 | 0.031 | 0.705 | 0.006 | 0.79 | 0.002 | 0.766 | 0.003 |
| 55 | 0.607 | 0.016 | 0.593 | 0.021 | 0.857 | <0.001 | 0.734 | 0.004 | −0.105 | 0.605 | 0.448 | 0.065 | 0.105 | 0.331 |
| 60 | 0.644 | 0.018 | 0.547 | 0.032 | 0.909 | <0.001 | 0.95 | <0.001 | −0.018 | 0.485 | 0.943 | <0.001 | 0.646 | 0.013 |
| 65 | 0.416 | 0.045 | 0.01 | 0.448 | 0.914 | <0.001 | 0.914 | <0.001 | 0.353 | 0.113 | 0.872 | <0.001 | 0.813 | 0.001 |
| 70 | 0.421 | 0.049 | 0.615 | 0.017 | 0.88 | <0.001 | 0.929 | <0.001 | 0.075 | 0.366 | 0.744 | 0.004 | 0.825 | 0.001 |
| 75 | 0.658 | 0.008 | 0.05 | 0.397 | 0.926 | <0.001 | 0.938 | <0.001 | 0.001 | 0.459 | 0.919 | <0.001 | 0.521 | 0.039 |
| 80 | 0.688 | 0.009 | 0.589 | 0.022 | 0.898 | <0.001 | 0.933 | <0.001 | −0.032 | 0.504 | 0.263 | 0.177 | 0.714 | 0.006 |
| 85 | 0.306 | 0.169 | −0.072 | 0.559 | 0.821 | 0.001 | 0.898 | <0.001 | 0.019 | 0.436 | 0.685 | 0.008 | 0.717 | 0.005 |
| 90 | 0.317 | 0.147 | 0.554 | 0.03 | 0.803 | 0.001 | 0.743 | 0.004 | 0.266 | 0.175 | 0.844 | 0.001 | 0.8 | 0.001 |
| 95 | 0.048 | 0.399 | 0.658 | 0.011 | 0.853 | <0.001 | 0.593 | 0.021 | 0.569 | 0.026 | 0.659 | 0.011 | 0.843 | 0.001 |
| 100 | −0.253 | 0.835 | 0.799 | 0.001 | 0.88 | <0.001 | 0.665 | 0.01 | 0.583 | 0.023 | 0.463 | 0.059 | 0.461 | 0.059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
Sig. ICC: Significant difference in intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC); SD: standard deviation; The highlighted cells indicate significant difference existed in ICC test (p < 0.05).