Miller Emily J, Kaufman Kenton R
Motion Analysis Laboratory, Mayo Clinic Rochester, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Gait Posture. 2018 Jan;59:174-176. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.10.014. Epub 2017 Oct 10.
In motion analysis, the hip joint center (HJC) is used to define the proximal location of the thigh segment and is also the point about which hip moments are calculated. The HJC cannot be palpated; its location must be calculated. Functional methods have been proposed but are difficult to perform by some clinical populations. Therefore, regression methods are utilized, but yield large errors in estimating the HJC location. These prediction methods typically utilize the anterior and posterior superior iliac spines, where excessive adipose tissue makes correctly locating difficult. A new regression method (Hara) utilizes leg length and has been shown to improve HJC location in cadavers and less error than previous pelvic based regression methods, such as those proposed by Harrington et al. This study compared the accuracy of the HJC location calculated with both of the Harrington methods and the Hara method. The coronal knee angle was calculated for each method using a static motion analysis trial, and compared to the tibiofemoral angle measured on a gold standard digital full-leg coronal radiograph. This study demonstrated that the Hara method was more accurate than either of the Harrington methods. The mean error between the gold standard x-ray measurement and the motion analysis calculation for the Harrington (stepwise and LOOCV), the Harrington (linear regression), and Hara regression methods, respectively were 6.0°, 4.0°, and 1.8°. Accurately modeling the HJC is critical for data interpretation and patient care. This study confirmed that the Hara HJC regression method is valid in an in-vivo setting.
在运动分析中,髋关节中心(HJC)用于定义大腿段的近端位置,也是计算髋关节力矩的点。HJC无法通过触诊确定;其位置必须通过计算得出。虽然已经提出了功能方法,但某些临床人群难以实施。因此,采用了回归方法,但在估计HJC位置时会产生较大误差。这些预测方法通常利用髂前上棘和髂后上棘,但过多的脂肪组织使得准确定位变得困难。一种新的回归方法(原方法)利用腿长,已被证明在尸体研究中能改善HJC位置,且比之前基于骨盆的回归方法(如哈灵顿等人提出的方法)误差更小。本研究比较了用哈灵顿两种方法和原方法计算的HJC位置的准确性。使用静态运动分析试验为每种方法计算冠状面膝关节角度,并与在金标准数字全腿冠状面X线片上测量的胫股角度进行比较。本研究表明,原方法比哈灵顿的任何一种方法都更准确。哈灵顿(逐步法和留一法交叉验证)、哈灵顿(线性回归)和原回归方法在金标准X线测量和运动分析计算之间的平均误差分别为6.0°、4.0°和1.8°。准确模拟HJC对于数据解释和患者护理至关重要。本研究证实原HJC回归方法在体内环境中是有效的。