Kainz Hans, Carty Christopher P, Modenese Luca, Boyd Roslyn N, Lloyd David G
School of Allied Health Sciences, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia; Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia; Queensland Children's Gait Laboratory, Queensland Paediatric Rehabilitation Service, Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, Australia.
School of Allied Health Sciences, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia; Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia; Queensland Children's Gait Laboratory, Queensland Paediatric Rehabilitation Service, Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, Australia.
Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2015 May;30(4):319-29. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.02.005. Epub 2015 Feb 16.
Inaccuracies in locating the three-dimensional position of the hip joint centre affect the calculated hip and knee kinematics, force- and moment-generating capacity of muscles and hip joint mechanics, which can lead to incorrect interpretations and recommendations in gait analysis. Several functional and predictive methods have been developed to estimate the hip joint centre location, and the International Society of Biomechanics recommends a functional approach for use with participants that have adequate range of motion at the hip, and predictive methods in those with insufficient range of motion. The purpose of the current systematic review was to substantiate the International Society of Biomechanics recommendations. This included identifying the most accurate functional and predictive methods, and defining 'adequate' range of motion.
A systematic search with broad search terms was performed including five databases.
The systematic search yielded to 801 articles, of which 34 papers were included. Eleven different predictive and 13 different functional methods were identified. The results showed that the geometric sphere fit method and Harrington equations are the most accurate functional and predictive approaches respectively that have been evaluated in vivo.
In regard to the International Society of Biomechanics recommendations, the geometric sphere fit method should be used in people with sufficient active hip range of motion and the Harrington equations should be used in patients without sufficient hip range of motion. Multi-plane movement trials with at least 60° of flexion-extension and 30° of ab-adduction range of motion are suggested when using functional methods.
髋关节中心三维位置定位不准确会影响所计算的髋部和膝部运动学、肌肉产生力和力矩的能力以及髋关节力学,这可能导致在步态分析中产生错误的解释和建议。已经开发了几种功能和预测方法来估计髋关节中心位置,国际生物力学学会建议对髋关节活动范围足够的参与者采用功能法,对活动范围不足的参与者采用预测法。本系统评价的目的是证实国际生物力学学会的建议。这包括确定最准确的功能和预测方法,以及定义“足够的”活动范围。
使用宽泛的检索词进行系统检索,包括五个数据库。
系统检索得到801篇文章,其中纳入34篇论文。确定了11种不同的预测方法和13种不同的功能方法。结果表明,几何球拟合方法和哈林顿方程分别是在体内评估过的最准确的功能和预测方法。
关于国际生物力学学会的建议,对于髋关节主动活动范围足够的人应使用几何球拟合方法,对于髋关节活动范围不足的患者应使用哈林顿方程。使用功能方法时,建议进行至少60°屈伸和30°内收外展活动范围的多平面运动试验。