Department of Bioengineering and Surgery and Cancer, Royal School of Mines, South Kensington Campus, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom.
Gait Posture. 2013 Sep;38(4):1032-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.05.019. Epub 2013 Jun 19.
Multiple marker sets and models are currently available for assessing pelvic kinematics in gait. Despite the presence of a variety models, there are still debates on their reliability and consistency, and consequently there is no clearly defined standard. Two marker sets were evaluated in this study: the 'Traditional' where markers are placed at the anterior and posterior superior iliac spines (ASISs, PSISs); and the 'Cluster', where a cluster of three orthogonal markers fixed on a rigid based is attached to the sacrum. The two sets were compared with respect to intra and inter session standard deviations of maximum pelvic tilt, obliquity and rotation angles. The repeatability between and within sessions was measured using coefficient of multiple correlation (CMC). Also the similarity between the two sets was assessed using inter-protocol CMC (ipCMC). Both data sets generated showed high within and between session repeatability in the sagittal plane (CMC>0.80), although the Cluster method showed higher repeatability than that of the Traditional method in non-sagittal plane motion for both within and between sessions. The authors are not aware of other studies reporting the differences in intra and inter session variability and repeatability values for different body mass index categories such as overweight and obese subjects with relatively large sample size. Hence the Cluster method overcomes a number of theoretical and experimental limitations such as minimising the marker occlusion and is a reliable alternative to the Traditional (the standard) marker set.
目前有多种标记集和模型可用于评估步态中的骨盆运动。尽管存在多种模型，但它们的可靠性和一致性仍存在争议，因此没有明确的标准。本研究评估了两种标记集：“传统”标记集，标记位于前上髂棘（ASIS）和后上髂棘（PSIS）；“集群”标记集，在刚性基座上固定三个正交标记的集群附着在骶骨上。这两组标记集在最大骨盆倾斜、倾斜和旋转角度的内和间测试标准差方面进行了比较。使用多重相关系数（CMC）测量了组间和组内的可重复性。还使用协议间 CMC（ipCMC）评估了两组之间的相似性。两组数据都显示出矢状面内高的组内和组间可重复性（CMC>0.80），尽管集群方法在矢状面外运动中显示出比传统方法更高的可重复性，无论是在组内还是组间。作者不知道其他研究报告过不同体重指数类别的个体（如超重和肥胖个体）在不同的内和间测试变异性和可重复性值方面的差异，而这些个体具有相对较大的样本量。因此，集群方法克服了许多理论和实验限制，例如最小化标记遮挡，并且是传统（标准）标记集的可靠替代方法。
