An Apparatus and Protocol to Measure Shoulder Girdle Strength

2007 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 246-253
Author(s):  
Brian A. Garner ◽  
Jaeho Shim ◽  
Scott Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Motion Capture ◽  
Isometric Force ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Elevation Angle ◽  
Shoulder Girdle ◽  
Total Force ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Clinical Tool ◽  
Horizontal Beam ◽  
Flexion Extension

Muscles actuating the shoulder girdle are important for stabilizing the scapula and coordinating phased kinematics of the shoulder complex. If these muscles become weak or imbalanced, joint instability and injury may result. Reliable measurement of shoulder strength is thus important for prevention, diagnosis, and rehabilitation of shoulder problems. To date, studies quantifying the strength of the shoulder girdle are limited. The purpose of this work was to design and evaluate a custom apparatus and corresponding protocol for measuring maximal, voluntary, isometric strength of the shoulder girdle during various forms of shrugging exercise. A custom apparatus was constructed as a rigid frame with a vertical post supporting a seat, seat back, and horizontal beam. The beam extends laterally on either side beyond and around the shoulders of a seated subject. A pair of arm extension members pivots on the beam about an axis aligned with the shoulder flexion-extension axis. These members can be locked in place at any angle. Between them is mounted a force-sensing grip assembly, which can be adjusted proximally or distally to accommodate varying shoulder girdle positions. Subjects grasp the grip assembly handles with extended elbows and push or pull as forcefully as possible. Nine female and ten male subjects participated in a protocol using the apparatus to measure maximum isometric force generated at three positions each for elevation, depression, protraction, and retraction of the shoulder girdle (3positions×4modes=12tests). A video motion capture system was used to measure shoulder girdle angles. The reliability of the approach was evaluated based on the repeatability of measured shoulder elevation angle, protraction angle, and total force over three days of testing. The apparatus performed well during the tests, providing a stable, rigid, yet adjustable platform for measuring shoulder girdle strength. Repeatability of force measurements was interpreted as very good to excellent, with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (2,1) values ranging from 0.83 to 0.95 for all tests except one (ICC=0.79). Repeatability of angle measurements was interpreted as good to excellent. For tests measuring elevation and depression strength, the ICC of elevation angle ranged from 0.85 to 0.89. For tests measuring protraction and retraction strength, the ICC of protraction angle ranged from 0.68 to 0.88. This type of apparatus could be an effective clinical tool for measuring strength in the shoulder girdle muscles. Use of the video motion capture system is optional.

scholarly journals Dual Kinect v2 system can capture lower limb kinematics reasonably well in a clinical setting: concurrent validity of a dual camera markerless motion capture system in professional football players

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. e000441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Argyro Kotsifaki ◽  
Rodney Whiteley ◽  
Clint Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Motion Capture ◽  
Excellent Agreement ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Kinect V2 ◽  
Markerless Motion Capture ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Limb Kinematics ◽  
Kinematic Evaluation ◽  
Lower Limb Kinematics

ObjectivesTo determine whether a dual-camera markerless motion capture system can be used for lower limb kinematic evaluation in athletes in a preseason screening setting.DesignDescriptive laboratory study.SettingLaboratory setting.ParticipantsThirty-four (n=34) healthy athletes.Main outcome measuresThree dimensional lower limb kinematics during three functional tests: Single Leg Squat (SLS), Single Leg Jump, Modified Counter-movement Jump. The tests were simultaneously recorded using both a marker-based motion capture system and two Kinect v2 cameras using iPi Mocap Studio software.ResultsExcellent agreement between systems for the flexion/extension range of motion of the shin during all tests and for the thigh abduction/adduction during SLS were seen. For peak angles, results showed excellent agreement for knee flexion. Poor correlation was seen for the rotation movements.ConclusionsThis study supports the use of dual Kinect v2 configuration with the iPi software as a valid tool for assessment of sagittal and frontal plane hip and knee kinematic parameters but not axial rotation in athletes.

scholarly journals Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion ControllerTM with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1750
Author(s):  
Amartya Ganguly ◽  
Gabriel Rashidi ◽  
Katja Mombaur
Keyword(s):  
Motion Capture ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Ring Finger ◽  
Healthcare Services ◽  
Leap Motion ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Standard Marker ◽  
Motion Capture Systems

Over the last few years, the Leap Motion Controller™ (LMC) has been increasingly used in clinical environments to track hand, wrist and forearm positions as an alternative to the gold-standard motion capture systems. Since the LMC is marker-less, portable, easy-to-use and low-cost, it is rapidly being adopted in healthcare services. This paper demonstrates the comparison of finger kinematic data between the LMC and a gold-standard marker-based motion capture system, Qualisys Track Manager (QTM). Both systems were time synchronised, and the participants performed abduction/adduction of the thumb and flexion/extension movements of all fingers. The LMC and QTM were compared in both static measuring finger segment lengths and dynamic flexion movements of all fingers. A Bland–Altman plot was used to demonstrate the performance of the LMC versus QTM with Pearson’s correlation (r) to demonstrate trends in the data. Only the proximal interphalangeal joint (PIP) joint of the middle and ring finger during flexion/extension demonstrated acceptable agreement (r = 0.9062; r = 0.8978), but with a high mean bias. In conclusion, the study shows that currently, the LMC is not suitable to replace gold-standard motion capture systems in clinical settings. Further studies should be conducted to validate the performance of the LMC as it is updated and upgraded.

scholarly journals Placement Recommendations for Single Kinect-Based Motion Capture System in Unilateral Dynamic Motion Analysis

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 1076
Author(s):  
Laisi Cai ◽  
Dongwei Liu ◽  
Ye Ma
Keyword(s):  
Motion Analysis ◽  
Motion Capture ◽  
Upper Limb ◽  
Kinematic Model ◽  
Sensor Placement ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Kinect Sensor ◽  
3D Motion ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
3D Motion Capture

Low-cost, portable, and easy-to-use Kinect-based systems achieved great popularity in out-of-the-lab motion analysis. The placement of a Kinect sensor significantly influences the accuracy in measuring kinematic parameters for dynamics tasks. We conducted an experiment to investigate the impact of sensor placement on the accuracy of upper limb kinematics during a typical upper limb functional task, the drinking task. Using a 3D motion capture system as the golden standard, we tested twenty-one Kinect positions with three different distances and seven orientations. Upper limb joint angles, including shoulder flexion/extension, shoulder adduction/abduction, shoulder internal/external rotation, and elbow flexion/extension angles, are calculated via our developed Kinect kinematic model and the UWA kinematic model for both the Kinect-based system and the 3D motion capture system. We extracted the angles at the point of the target achieved (PTA). The mean-absolute-error (MEA) with the standard represents the Kinect-based system’s performance. We conducted a two-way repeated measure ANOVA to explore the impacts of distance and orientation on the MEAs for all upper limb angles. There is a significant main effect for orientation. The main effects for distance and the interaction effects do not reach statistical significance. The post hoc test using LSD test for orientation shows that the effect of orientation is joint-dependent and plane-dependent. For a complex task (e.g., drinking), which involves body occlusions, placing a Kinect sensor right in front of a subject is not a good choice. We suggest that place a Kinect sensor at the contralateral side of a subject with the orientation around 30∘ to 45∘ for upper limb functional tasks. For all kinds of dynamic tasks, we put forward the following recommendations for the placement of a Kinect sensor. First, set an optimal sensor position for capture, making sure that all investigated joints are visible during the whole task. Second, sensor placement should avoid body occlusion at the maximum extension. Third, if an optimal location cannot be achieved in an out-of-the-lab environment, researchers could put the Kinect sensor at an optimal orientation by trading off the factor of distance. Last, for those need to assess functions of both limbs, the users can relocate the sensor and re-evaluate the functions of the other side once they finish evaluating functions of one side of a subject.

scholarly journals Accuracy of a Low-Cost 3D-Printed Wearable Goniometer for Measuring Wrist Motion

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (14) ◽  
pp. 4799
Author(s):  
Calvin Young ◽  
Sarah DeDecker ◽  
Drew Anderson ◽  
Michele L. Oliver ◽  
Karen D. Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Motion Capture ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Wearable Device ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Wrist Motion ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Optical Motion ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Optical Motion Capture

Wrist motion provides an important metric for disease monitoring and occupational risk assessment. The collection of wrist kinematics in occupational or other real-world environments could augment traditional observational or video-analysis based assessment. We have developed a low-cost 3D printed wearable device, capable of being produced on consumer grade desktop 3D printers. Here we present a preliminary validation of the device against a gold standard optical motion capture system. Data were collected from 10 participants performing a static angle matching task while seated at a desk. The wearable device output was significantly correlated with the optical motion capture system yielding a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.991 and 0.972 for flexion/extension (FE) and radial/ulnar deviation (RUD) respectively (p < 0.0001). Error was similarly low with a root mean squared error of 4.9° (FE) and 3.9° (RUD). Agreement between the two systems was quantified using Bland–Altman analysis, with bias and 95% limits of agreement of 3.1° ± 7.4° and −0.16° ± 7.7° for FE and RUD, respectively. These results compare favourably with current methods for occupational assessment, suggesting strong potential for field implementation.

scholarly journals Measurement of Ankle Joint Movements Using IMUs during Running

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 4240
Author(s):  
Byong Hun Kim ◽  
Sung Hyun Hong ◽  
In Wook Oh ◽  
Yang Woo Lee ◽  
In Ho Kee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankle Joint ◽  
Motion Capture ◽  
Wearable Sensors ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Frontal Plane ◽  
Joint Kinematics ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Joint Angles ◽  
Pearson Coefficient ◽  
Coefficient Corrélation

Gait analysis has historically been implemented in laboratory settings only with expensive instruments; yet, recently, efforts to develop and integrate wearable sensors into clinical applications have been made. A limited number of previous studies have been conducted to validate inertial measurement units (IMUs) for measuring ankle joint kinematics, especially with small movement ranges. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to validate the ability of available IMUs to accurately measure the ankle joint angles by comparing the ankle joint angles measured using a wearable device with those obtained using a motion capture system during running. Ten healthy subjects participated in the study. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement were calculated for reliability, whereas the Pearson coefficient correlation was performed for validity. The results showed that the day-to-day reliability was excellent (0.974 and 0.900 for sagittal and frontal plane, respectively), and the validity was good in both sagittal (r = 0.821, p < 0.001) and frontal (r = 0.835, p < 0.001) planes for ankle joints. In conclusion, we suggest that the developed device could be used as an alternative tool for the 3D motion capture system for assessing ankle joint kinematics.

scholarly journals Measurement of Ankle Joint Movements using IMUs during Running

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Byonghun Kim ◽  
Sunghyun Hong ◽  
Inwook Oh ◽  
Yangwoo Lee ◽  
Inho Kee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankle Joint ◽  
Motion Capture ◽  
Wearable Sensors ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Method ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Joint Angles ◽  
Pearson Coefficient ◽  
Ankle Joints ◽  
Coefficient Corrélation

Gait analysis has historically been implemented in laboratory settings with expensive instruments; however, recently, wearable sensors have allowed the integration into clinical applications and use in daily activities. Previous studies have shown poor validity of ankle joints using inertial measurement units (IMUs), especially for small movement ranges. The purpose of this study was to validate the ability of commercially available IMUs to accurately measure the ankle joint angles during running. Ten healthy subjects participated in the study. Validation was performed by comparing the ankle joint angles measured using the wearable device with those obtained using the gold standard motion capture system during running. Reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient and standard error of measurement, whereas validity was evaluated using Pearson coefficient correlation method. Day-to-day reliability was excellent in the two planes for ankle joints. Validity was good in both sagittal and frontal planes for ankle joints. The results suggested that the developed device might be used as an alternative tool to the 3D motion capture system.

scholarly journals Comparison of a New Inertial Sensor Based System with an Optoelectronic Motion Capture System for Motion Analysis of Healthy Human Wrist Joints

Sensors ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (23) ◽  
pp. 5297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Alexander Wirth ◽  
Gabriella Fischer ◽  
Jorge Verdú ◽  
Lisa Reissner ◽  
Simone Balocco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Motion Capture ◽  
Inertial Measurement Unit ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Measurement Unit ◽  
Good Precision ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Ulnar Deviation ◽  
Inertial Measurement ◽  
Flexion Extension

This study aims to compare a new inertial measurement unit based system with the highly accurate but complex laboratory gold standard, an optoelectronic motion capture system. Inertial measurement units are sensors based on accelerometers, gyroscopes, and/or magnetometers. Ten healthy subjects were recorded while performing flexion-extension and radial-ulnar deviation movements of their right wrist using inertial sensors and skin markers. Maximum range of motion during these trials and mean absolute difference between the systems were calculated. A difference of 10° ± 5° for flexion-extension and 2° ± 1° for radial-ulnar deviation was found between the two systems with absolute range of motion values of 126° and 50° in the respective axes. A Wilcoxon rank sum test resulted in a no statistical differences between the systems with p-values of 0.24 and 0.62. The observed results are even more precise than reports from previous studies, where differences between 14° and 27° for flexion-extension and differences between 6° and 17° for radial-ulnar deviation were found. Effortless and fast applicability, good precision, and low inter-observer variability make inertial measurement unit based systems applicable to clinical settings.

scholarly journals Agreement Between the Spatiotemporal Gait Parameters of Healthy Adults From the OptoGait System and a Traditional Three-Dimensional Motion Capture System

2018 ◽  
Vol 141 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aoife Healy ◽  
Kimberley Linyard-Tough ◽  
Nachiappan Chockalingam
Keyword(s):  
Motion Analysis ◽  
Motion Capture ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Healthy Adults ◽  
Systematic Bias ◽  
Motion Analysis System ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Gait Parameters ◽  
Analysis System

While previous research has assessed the validity of the OptoGait system to the GAITRite walkway and an instrumented treadmill, no research to date has assessed this system against a traditional three-dimensional motion analysis system. Additionally, previous research has shown that the OptoGait system shows systematic bias when compared to other systems due to the configuration of the system's hardware. This study examined the agreement between the spatiotemporal gait parameters calculated from the OptoGait system and a three-dimensional motion capture (14 camera Vicon motion capture system and 2 AMTI force plates) in healthy adults. Additionally, a range of filter settings for the OptoGait were examined to determine if it was possible to eliminate any systematic bias between the OptoGait and the three-dimensional motion analysis system. Agreement between the systems was examined using 95% limits of agreement by Bland and Altman and the intraclass correlation coefficient. A repeated measure ANOVA was used to detect any systematic differences between the systems. Findings confirm the validity of the OptoGait system for the evaluation of spatiotemporal gait parameters in healthy adults. Furthermore, recommendations on filter settings which eliminate the systematic bias between the OptoGait and the three-dimensional motion analysis system are provided.

Validity of the Open Barbell and Tendo Weightlifting Analyzer Systems Versus the Optotrak Certus 3D Motion-Capture System for Barbell Velocity

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 540-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob A. Goldsmith ◽  
Cameron Trepeck ◽  
Jessica L. Halle ◽  
Kristin M. Mendez ◽  
Alex Klemp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motion Capture ◽  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Motion Capture System ◽  
Training Experience ◽  
Warm Up ◽  
3 Dimensional ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ◽  
3D Motion Capture

Purpose: To examine the validity of 2 linear position transducers, the Tendo Weightlifting Analyzer System (TWAS) and Open Barbell System (OBS), compared with a criterion device, the Optotrak Certus 3-dimensional motion-capture system (OC3D). Methods: A total of 25 men (age, 25 [3] y; height, 174.0 [6.7] cm; body mass, 89.0 [14.7] kg; squat 1-repetition maximum [1RM], 175.8 [34.7] kg) with ≥2 y of resistance-training experience completed a back 1RM and 1 set to failure at 70% of 1RM. Average concentric velocity (ACV) and peak concentric velocity (PCV) were recorded by all 3 devices during the final warm-up set, all 1RM attempts, and every repetition during the 70% set. Results: In total, 575 samples were obtained. Bland–Altman plots, mountain plots, a 1-way analysis of variance, SEM, and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to analyze validity. The analysis of variance showed no difference (P = .089) between devices for ACV. However, for PCV, TWAS was significantly different (ie, inaccurate) from OC3D (P < .001) and OBS (P = .001), but OBS was similar (P = .412) to OC3D. For ACV, intraclass correlation coefficients were higher for OBS than for TWAS. Bland–Altman plots showed agreement for ACV for both devices against OC3D but large limits of agreement for PCV for both devices. Mountain plots showed valid ACV for both devices, however, but slightly greater ACV and PCV accuracy with OBS than TWAS. Conclusions: Both devices may provide valid ACV measurements, but some metrics suggest more accurate ACV with OBS vs TWAS. For PCV, neither device is particularly accurate; however, OBS seems to be more accurate than TWAS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document