2021
DOI: 10.1007/s11845-021-02827-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A mobile application tool for standing posture analysis: development, validity, and reliability

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
7
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
7
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The visual evaluation with a plumb line is cheap, but it requires specialized personnel, is prone to bias, and lacks scientific validation [ 11 ]. The use of goniometers is feasible for the measurement of the range of motion and angles of different joints with good reliability [ 12 ]; it has a low cost and is easy to perform, although it presents some methodological issues when assessing postural deviations [ 13 ], and it is only considered useful for one postural variable examination at the time [ 5 ]. Marker-based advanced technologies that can provide highly accurate data on joint angles and translations are potentially available for clinicians; however, these evaluation systems are too expensive for the average clinic, and often they are employed for research purposes only [ 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The visual evaluation with a plumb line is cheap, but it requires specialized personnel, is prone to bias, and lacks scientific validation [ 11 ]. The use of goniometers is feasible for the measurement of the range of motion and angles of different joints with good reliability [ 12 ]; it has a low cost and is easy to perform, although it presents some methodological issues when assessing postural deviations [ 13 ], and it is only considered useful for one postural variable examination at the time [ 5 ]. Marker-based advanced technologies that can provide highly accurate data on joint angles and translations are potentially available for clinicians; however, these evaluation systems are too expensive for the average clinic, and often they are employed for research purposes only [ 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this heterogeneous scenario regarding the available postural evaluation tools, the advancement in image-based technologies will come in handy for clinicians and researchers who want to find a postural assessment system with good reproducibility and an affordable cost. Tablet and phone apps for postural evaluation can fill this gap, with different postural apps demonstrating promising results in the evaluation of the frontal plane [ 15 ], standing posture [ 13 ], angulation variables [ 14 ], and head shift in sagittal and frontal planes [ 4 ]; however, the literature is insufficient to confirm the quality of these methods. Considering that the complete visual evaluation of body posture with goniometers and a plumb line can be long and not free from biases, and taking into account the high costs of 3D systems, the use of a mobile app could represent a quick, safe, and accurate method for researchers and clinicians to quantitatively evaluate general posture.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[33] The use of postural assessment tools with mobile applications has increased in the past decade. [34] The PSM was the most used application tool in posture analysis between 2012 and 2020. [35] We used the PSM application for postural assessment and found that postural disorders occur in cases with edema.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…28 Although pose estimation has received some recognition as a method to evaluate posture, its application to clinical evaluation remains controversial. 15,29 While many nonradiographic methods to evaluate scoliosis have been proposed in recent decades, 13 clinical photography using pose estimation had not yet been compared with radiography, the criterion standard. To our knowledge, no reports have mentioned its use in patients with AIS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%