2017 14th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications &Amp; Networking Conference (CCNC) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/ccnc.2017.7983095
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hand goniometric measurements using leap motion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
14
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, goniometry is the current clinical standard, and there is a plethora of studies related to measurements, protocols and different goniometers [ 15 ]. Moreover, comparable studies evaluated new and existing sensors and measurement protocols against the goniometer, reporting promising results and significant reduction in measurement time, yet asking for further improvements in measurements protocols [ 24 , 27 , 33 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, goniometry is the current clinical standard, and there is a plethora of studies related to measurements, protocols and different goniometers [ 15 ]. Moreover, comparable studies evaluated new and existing sensors and measurement protocols against the goniometer, reporting promising results and significant reduction in measurement time, yet asking for further improvements in measurements protocols [ 24 , 27 , 33 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been indicated that due to internal constraints of hand angles estimation, the leap is not a promising sensory modality for clinical practice [ 24 ]. However, a recent study showed promising results for the finger MCP joints using the Leap motion sensor [ 27 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, good to excellent concordance based on interclass correlation coefficient was identified for all fingers abduction, except for pinkie finger, and for metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint flexion of the medium finger. 18 Additionally, an accuracy of 85% was identified for MCP flexion and extension of all fingers moving at the same time, fingers neutral position, and wrist pronation and supination. 10 Also, an average difference of 5.73 degrees was identified for finger proximal interphalangeal (PIP) in the neutral position, thumb PIP flexion and radial abduction, and MCP flexion.…”
Section: Lm For Physical Rehabilitationmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…10 Also, an average difference of 5.73 degrees was identified for finger proximal interphalangeal (PIP) in the neutral position, thumb PIP flexion and radial abduction, and MCP flexion. 19 However, negative results were found for pinkie finger movements 18,19 and MCP flexion of most fingers. 18 Additionally, LM was found to have an accuracy of less than 0.5 mm when tested in a static setting.…”
Section: Lm For Physical Rehabilitationmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation