Reliability and minimal detectable change of gait kinematics in people who are hypermobile

Bates, Alexander Vernon; McGregor, Alison H.; Alexander, Caroline M.

doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.11.002

Cited by 15 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The calculated MDC values of both system are of similar values to those published in the literature (e.g. in Fernandes et al [29] stride length: 0.09 m, step length: 0.05 m, step width: 0.02 m, and peak parameters for hip flexion 7.9°, hip adduction 3.9°, knee angle 5.5–7°, or in Bates et al [30] ROM parameters for hip flexion: 2.51°, hip adduction 1.48°, hip rotation: 4.35°, knee angle: 5.34°, pelvis tilt: 1.34°, pelvis rotation: 1.88°). Most RMS errors are in the range of MDC of the OptiTrack system, thus this difference is not statistically significant when deviations from a healthy reference group is sought.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Affordable gait analysis using augmented reality markers

Nagymáté

Kiss

2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A typical optical based gait analysis laboratory uses expensive stereophotogrammetric motion capture systems. The study aims to propose and validate an affordable gait analysis method using augmented reality (AR) markers with a single action camera. Image processing software calculates the position and orientation of the AR markers. Anatomical landmark calibration is applied on the subject to calibrate each of the anatomical points with respect to their corresponding AR markers. This way, anatomical points are tracked through AR markers using homogeneous coordinate transformations, and the further processing of gait analysis is identical with conventional solutions. The proposed system was validated on nine participants of varying age using a conventional motion capture system on simultaneously measured treadmill gait trials on 2, 3 and 4.5 km/h walking speeds. Coordinates of the virtual anatomical points were compared using the Bland-Altman analysis. Spatial-temporal gait parameters (step length, stride length, walking base, cadence, pelvis range of motion) and angular gait parameters (range of motion of knee, hip and pelvis angles) were compared between measurement systems by RMS error and Bland-Altman analysis. The proposed method shows some differences in the raw coordinates of virtually tracked anatomical landmarks and gait parameters compared to the reference system. RMS errors of spatial parameters were below 23 mm, while the angular range of motion RMS errors varies from 2.55° to 6.73°. Some of these differences (e.g. knee angle range of motion) is comparable to previously reported differences between commercial motion capture systems and gait variability. The proposed method can be a very cheap gait analysis solution, but precision is not guaranteed for every aspect of gait analysis using the currently exemplified implementation of the AR marker tracking approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Affordable gait analysis using augmented reality markers

Nagymáté

Kiss

2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the intra-rater repeatability (between days) on knee rotation, this study showed good to excellent repeatability (Figs. 4(a), 5(a)), which was comparable to or better than the published values for classic MCS [1], [6], [10], [11]. At the key points of motion trajectory in FE rotation, the ICC values in the current study were 0.84~0.95 for intra-rater1 repeatability, while the SEM values were 1.21~2.06°.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…For each participant, the ensemble averaged curves of knee motion trajectory were calculated for analysis. Similarly to previous studies [1], [22], the motion parameters at four key points (initial contact (IC), peak knee flexion during stance (STPF), peak knee extension during stance (STPE), and peak flexion during swing, (SWPF)) and ROM during the gait cycle were chosen for the statistical analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, the large optical MCS could evaluate three-dimensional (3D) rotation of the knee joint without capability to distinguish the translation, like Vicon and Qualisys [1], [11]. However, ______________________________ almost all of previous studies reported only rotation repeatability [1], [10], [11], and only one paper reported anteroposterior repeatability in addition to rotation repeatability [9]. Second, as the gold standard method, biplane fluoroscopy could quantify skeletal movement precisely without the soft tissue artifacts [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating measurement accuracy and repeatability with a new device that records spatial knee movement

Tian

Huang

Zheng

et al. 2020

Acta Bioeng Biomech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: A novel portable system has been used to evaluate spatial knee movement, but its accuracy and repeatability is not known. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy and repeatability of the measurement. Methods: Ten healthy participants were included, and the knee motion trajectory during walking were assessed. Six evaluations were conducted (three days by two raters) for each participant. The motion parameters at the key points and the range of motion were statistically analyzed. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of the measurement (SEM), and the Bland–Altman method were used. Results: For intra-rater repeatability, 1) the ICC values range from 0.75 to 0.9 for rotations; and 0.64 to 0.96 for translations. Among the ICC values, 100% of rotations and 90% of translations were not less than 0.70; 2) among the SEM values, 100% of rotations were not more than 5°, while 73.3% of translations were less than 3 mm. For inter-rater repeatability, 1) the ICC values range from 0.68 to 0.99 for rotations; and 0.57 to 0.93 for translations. Among the ICC values, 95.6% of rotations and 82.2% of translations were not less than 0.70; 2) among the SEM values, 100% of rotations were not more than 5°, and 48.9% of translations were less than 3 mm. The Bland–Altman plots showed good agreement for intra- and inter- repeatability. Conclusions: The results indicated that the accuracy and repeatability of the measurement were acceptable, except for the inter-rater repeatability for translation. This may help researchers and physicians better interpret the measurement data.

show abstract

“…Similarly, there were no psychometric studies identified for PCI for the MS population. However, studies into the psychometric properties for 3D gait kinematics have demonstrated that 3D gait analysis is a reliable, valid and responsive tool for characterizing gait in stroke sufferers [70], CP [71][72][73] and many musculoskeletal disorders [74][75]. Similarly, the construct validity of the PCI has been assessed in the subacute stroke population and its reliability documented in children with cerebral palsy [76][77].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%