Accuracy and precision of gait events derived from motion capture in horses during walk and trot

Boye, J; Thomsen, Maj Halling; Pfau, Thilo; Olsen, E. G. J.

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.12.018

Cited by 18 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, the hoof-off kinematic detection method reported here demonstrated better accuracy at trot in the hindlimbs than the methods used by Starke and Clayton [9]. The hoof-off event at trot was comparable with some of the methods described by Boye et al [3]; however, the detection methods used in the earlier work appear to be more complex to execute than those employed in the present study. Some methods [3,7,9] are also dependent on velocity thresholds.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 48%

“…The hoof‐off event at trot was comparable with some of the methods described by Boye et al . ; however, the detection methods used in the earlier work appear to be more complex to execute than those employed in the present study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Some methods are also dependent on velocity thresholds. Surface properties can influence parameters such as hoof landing velocity , which may affect the repeatability of these methods if used on compliant surfaces.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous validations of kinematic gait events against force data have reported high levels of accuracy and precision [2,3,[6][7][8][9]. Most of these studies use hoof markers for event detection, but precise visual determination of hoof contact and lift off is difficult, especially on compliant surfaces [2,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A simple method for equine kinematic gait event detection

Holt

George

Clayton³

et al. 2017

Equine Veterinary Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 48%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A simple method for equine kinematic gait event detection

Holt

George

Clayton³

et al. 2017

Equine Veterinary Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The algorithm is based on direct kinematic data collected by the motion capture cameras 9. A detailed description of the motion capture algorithms is provided as Supplementary Item 3.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of distal limb mounted inertial measurement unit sensors for stride detection in Warmblood horses at walk and trot

Bragança

Bosch

Voskamp³

et al. 2016

Equine Veterinary Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBackgroundInertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor‐based techniques are becoming more popular in horses as a tool for objective locomotor assessment.ObjectivesTo describe, evaluate and validate a method of stride detection and quantification at walk and trot using distal limb mounted IMU sensors.Study designProspective validation study comparing IMU sensors and motion capture with force plate data.MethodsA total of seven Warmblood horses equipped with metacarpal/metatarsal IMU sensors and reflective markers for motion capture were hand walked and trotted over a force plate. Using four custom built algorithms hoof‐on/hoof‐off timing over the force plate were calculated for each trial from the IMU data. Accuracy of the computed parameters was calculated as the mean difference in milliseconds between the IMU or motion capture generated data and the data from the force plate, precision as the s.d. of these differences and percentage of error with accuracy of the calculated parameter as a percentage of the force plate stance duration.ResultsAccuracy, precision and percentage of error of the best performing IMU algorithm for stance duration at walk were 28.5, 31.6 ms and 3.7% for the forelimbs and −5.5, 20.1 ms and −0.8% for the hindlimbs, respectively. At trot the best performing algorithm achieved accuracy, precision and percentage of error of −27.6/8.8 ms/−8.4% for the forelimbs and 6.3/33.5 ms/9.1% for the hindlimbs.Main limitationsThe described algorithms have not been assessed on different surfaces.ConclusionsInertial measurement unit technology can be used to determine temporal kinematic stride variables at walk and trot justifying its use in gait and performance analysis. However, precision of the method may not be sufficient to detect all possible lameness‐related changes. These data seem promising enough to warrant further research to evaluate whether this approach will be useful for appraising the majority of clinically relevant gait changes encountered in practice.

show abstract

Accuracy and precision of gait events derived from motion capture in horses during walk and trot

Cited by 18 publications

References 26 publications

A simple method for equine kinematic gait event detection

A simple method for equine kinematic gait event detection

Validation of distal limb mounted inertial measurement unit sensors for stride detection in Warmblood horses at walk and trot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About