Literature DB >> 32067756

The sensitivity of joint kinematics and kinetics to marker placement during a change of direction task.

Ciarán McFadden1, Katherine Daniels2, Siobhán Strike3.   

Abstract

The conventional gait model (CGM) refers to several closely related biomechanical models used in the objective analysis of human motion. Their use has become popular in the analysis of change of direction tasks to inform best practice in the prevention and rehabilitation of anterior cruciate ligament injury. As externally-placed markers define segment axes origins and orientations, kinematic and kinetic outputs from the CGM are sensitive to marker placement. The aim of this investigation was to quantify the sensitivity of lower extremity kinematics and knee moments to systematic differences in marker placement across the stance phase of a change of direction task. Systematic anterior/posterior displacements were applied to the lateral thigh, femoral epicondyle and tibia markers in software. One-dimensional statistical parametric mapping was used to determine the effect of marker placement across the entire stance phase of a 90° change of direction task. Marker placement error within previously reported inter-tester variability ranges caused significant differences in knee abduction moment, hip rotation angle, knee rotation angle, ankle abduction and rotation angle across various periods of stance. Discrete measures of these variables have been associated with increased frontal plane knee loading during change of direction, considered a key mechanism of anterior cruciate ligament injury. Systematic differences in marker placement may lead to incorrect group statistical inferences in such discrete measures.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior cruciate ligament; Change of direction; Marker placement; Statistical parametric mapping

Year:  2020        PMID: 32067756     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.109635

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


  4 in total

1.  Conclusion or Illusion: Quantifying Uncertainty in Inverse Analyses From Marker-Based Motion Capture due to Errors in Marker Registration and Model Scaling.

Authors:  Thomas K Uchida; Ajay Seth
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-05-25

2.  Agreement between An Inertia and Optical Based Motion Capture during the VU-Return-to-Play- Field-Test.

Authors:  Chris Richter; Katherine A J Daniels; Enda King; Andrew Franklyn-Miller
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 3.576

3.  The Conventional Gait Model's sensitivity to lower-limb marker placement.

Authors:  M Fonseca; M Bergere; J Candido; F Leboeuf; R Dumas; S Armand
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-08-20       Impact factor: 4.996

4.  Spinal Palpation Error and Its Impact on Skin Marker-Based Spinal Alignment Measurement in Adult Spinal Deformity.

Authors:  Pieter Severijns; Thomas Overbergh; Stefan Schmid; Lieven Moke; Lennart Scheys
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2021-06-23
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.