Felemban, Mohannad, Al-Amri, Mohammad  ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2806-0462, Alsaedi, Turki and Button, Kate ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1073-9901
2020.
Comparison of joint kinematics measurements during single leg distance hop by using body-worn sensors and video camera motion analysis.
Presented at: Physiotherapy UK,
Birmingham,
1-2 November 2019.
Physiotherapy.
, vol.107
(S1)
Elsevier,
pp. E95-E96.
10.1016/j.physio.2020.03.134
|
Abstract
Purpose: Movement analysis is an essential component in assessing patient joint kinematics within physiotherapy clinical settings. Video-based 2-dimensional (2D) movement analysis is the most widely available tool in physiotherapy settings. Portable inertial sensors technology has been introduced as a validated 3-Dimensional (3D) movement analysis tool. However, the similarity of kinematic measurements made by 2D video analysis compared to 3D analysis in sagittal and frontal planes is questionable, for high-speed complex tasks, such as hopping. The aim of this study was to compare joint angular kinematics provided by inertial sensors (Xsens MVN Analyze system) against joint kinematics provided by digital video cameras and Kinovea video player goniometer software in sagittal and frontal planes during a single leg distance hop (SLDH) task. Methods: A correlational design was used on a convenience sample of twenty-five healthy volunteer participants. Participants performed five trials of the SLDH task on each limb whilst their movement was captured by two video cameras and seventeen inertial sensors. Joint angles were quantified at peak knee flexion during hop landing for the hip and knee joint in the sagittal and frontal planes and for the ankle joint angle in the sagittal plane. The 2D movement analysis software (Kinovea) and the 3D movement analysis software (Xsens MVN Analyze) were used in processing the data and extracting the angles. The Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the correlation between the 2D and 3D methods. The Bland-Altman's plot was used to assess the limits of agreement (95%) between the two methods for each joint in the sagittal and frontal plane. Results: Joint angle measures for the hip, knee, and ankle exhibited moderate to strong correlation (ICC=0.615 - 0.938) between the two movement analysis methods in the sagittal plane and exhibited poor correlation (ICC=0.184 - 0.337) in the frontal plane. Furthermore, the Bland-Altman's plots for the sagittal and frontal plane showed that there was a smaller range between the limits of agreement for joint angles measured in the sagittal plane compared to those measured in the frontal plane. Conclusion(s): The results of this study suggest that both the sensor (3D) and video camera (2D) methods were comparable at quantifying hip, knee and ankle joint angles in the sagittal plane during SLDH. However, for the frontal plane, the hip and knee angles measured using both tools were not comparable. Prior established validity of the sensors compared to laboratory-based motion analysis suggests that the sensors may provide a more accurate assessment of joint kinematics in the clinic for SLDH. Implications: Although assessing movement patterns in the sagittal plane is crucial, it has been suggested that movements in the frontal plane are considered key for assessing patients with knee injuries. If clinicians are looking for a more comprehensive analysis which includes the sagittal and frontal planes, they should consider the sensors as an alternative method for the gold-standard movement analysis system within the clinic.
| Item Type: | Conference or Workshop Item - published (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Date Type: | Publication |
| Status: | Published |
| Schools: | Schools > Healthcare Sciences Research Institutes & Centres > Arthritis Biomechanics Bioengineering Centre (ARUKBBC) |
| Publisher: | Elsevier |
| ISSN: | 0031-9406 |
| Last Modified: | 30 Apr 2026 13:17 |
| URI: | https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/130023 |
Actions (repository staff only)
 |
Edit Item |
Dimensions
Dimensions