Validity and Reliability of the Leomo Motion-Tracking Device Based on Inertial Measurement Unit with an Optoelectronic Camera System for Cycling Pedaling Evaluation

Abstract

Background: The use of inertial measurement sensors (IMUs), in the search for a more ecological measure, is spreading among sports professionals with the aim of improving the sports performance of cyclists. The kinematic evaluation using the Leomo system (TYPE-R, Leomo, Boulder, CO, USA) has become popular. Purpose: The present study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Leomo system by measuring the angular kinematics of the lower extremities in the sagittal plane during pedaling at different intensities compared to a gold-standard motion capture camera system (OptiTrack, Natural Point, Inc., Corvallis, OR, USA). Methods: Twenty-four elite cyclists recruited from national and international cycling teams performed two 6-min cycles of cycling on a cycle ergometer at two different intensities (first ventilatory threshold (VT1) and second ventilatory threshold (VT2)) in random order, with a 5 min rest between intensity conditions. The reliability and validity of the Leomo system versus the motion capture system were evaluated. Results: Both systems showed high validity and were consistently excellent in foot angular range Q1 (FAR (Q1)) and foot angular range (FAR) (ICC-VT1 between 0.91 and 0.95 and ICC-VT2 between 0.88 and 0.97), while the variables leg angular range (LAR) and pelvic angle showed a modest validity (ICC-VT1 from 0.52 to 0.71 and ICC-VT2 between 0.61 and 0.67). Compared with Optitrack, Leomo overestimated all the variables, especially the LAR and pelvic angle values, in a range between 12 and 15°. Conclusions: Leomo is a reliable and valid tool for analyzing the ranges of motion of the cyclist’s lower limbs in the sagittal plane, especially for the variables FAR (Q1) and FAR. However, its systematic error for FAR and Pelvic Angle values must be considered in sports performance analysis.

Validity of neural networks in determining lower limb kinematics in stationary cycling

“…However, RETUL ® does no disclose the cost of the system if you do not take part of their training module and extracts predetermined variables that have not been based on scienti c data. The LEOMO ® has shown to produce moderate levels of agreement (ICC = 0.52-0.71) for some outcomes [4], which are also not supported by robust scienti c evidence.…”

Effect of Flat Running Shoes on Hip Kinematics in Male Recreational Runners

“…Impact force data was obtained through 900 × 600 mm force plates (Kistler Instrument, Winterhur, Switzerland), sampling at 1000 Hz. Three−dimensional marker trajectories for the standing calibration and running trials were captured through an eight−video camera motion analysis system (Motion Analysis Inc., Santa Rosa, CA, USA), sampling at 200 Hz, which was considered the non−invasive gold standard of motion analysis and is widely used in biomechanical research [ 43 , 44 , 45 ]. The running speed was recorded using timing gates (Brower Timing Systems, Draper, UT, USA) located at both sides of the force plates with a spacing of 3 m ( Figure 2 ).…”