Ramirez Michelle, Negrete Rodney, J Hanney William, Kolber Morey J
Florida Hospital Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation, Orlando, FL, USA.
University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2018 Feb;13(1):86-93.
Two-dimensional (2D) analysis has the potential to identify individuals at risk for knee injury by measuring genu valgus during sport related tasks. The reliability of 2D mobile motion analysis in measuring genu valgus during a single leg hop test on individuals with anterior knee pain has not been examined.
To assess the reliability and concurrent validity of 2D mobile motion analysis and compare it to visual observation while analyzing dynamic genu valgus during a single leg hop test in subjects with anterior knee pain.
Cohort study; repeated measures.
Nineteen subjects experiencing anterior knee pain completed a single leg hop test with both lower extremities. Two investigators independently estimated the degrees of genu valgus with visual observation alone during the subjects' single leg hop. After the visual estimation, the investigators watched the video again using the 2D Spark Motion Pro™ application to pause the video and measured the amount of knee valgus with a virtual goniometer tool on the application. Interrater reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) model 2, k and intrarater rater reliability using model 3, k. Minimal detectable change, concurrent validity and limits of agreement were calculated.
Visual observation alone demonstrated interrater reliability ICCs of 0.682-0.685 on the symptomatic and non-symptomatic lower extremities respectively. The interrater reliability using the 2D application had ICC's of 0.927 and 0.792 on the symptomatic and non-symptomatic lower extremities respectively. The concurrent validity for 2D analysis and visual observation on the symptomatic lower extremity had ICC values of 0.96 (rater A) and 0.85 (rater B). The non-symptomatic lower extremity demonstrated concurrent validity ICC values of 0.95(rater A) and 0.65(rater B). The standard error of measurement(SEM) was 3.898 and 3.258 for the symptomatic and non-symptomatic lower extremity(LE) respectively for visual observation. When using the Spark Motion Pro™ application the SEM was 1.648 and 2.718 for the symptomatic and non-symptomatic LE respectively. The minimal detectable change (MDC) using visual observation alone was 5.58 and 4.68. When using the application, it was noted at 2.328 and 3.838 on the symptomatic and non-symptomatic LE respectively.
The results of this study support the use of a 2D mobile application as a reliable tool for measuring knee valgus in symptomatic subjects and offers reduced error (SEM = 1.648) when compared to visual observation alone (SEM = 3.898).
2B.
二维（2D）分析有潜力通过在与运动相关的任务中测量膝外翻来识别有膝关节损伤风险的个体。二维移动运动分析在对有膝前疼痛的个体进行单腿跳测试时测量膝外翻的可靠性尚未得到检验。
评估二维移动运动分析的可靠性和同时效度，并在分析有膝前疼痛的受试者单腿跳测试中的动态膝外翻时，将其与视觉观察进行比较。
队列研究；重复测量。
19名有膝前疼痛的受试者用双下肢完成单腿跳测试。两名研究者在受试者单腿跳时仅通过视觉观察独立估计膝外翻程度。视觉估计后，研究者再次使用二维Spark Motion Pro™应用程序观看视频，暂停视频，并使用该应用程序上的虚拟量角器工具测量膝外翻量。使用组内相关系数（ICC）模型2、k计算评分者间信度，使用模型3、k计算评分者内信度。计算最小可检测变化、同时效度和一致性界限。
仅视觉观察显示，在有症状和无症状下肢上，评分者间信度ICC分别为0.682 - 0.685。使用二维应用程序时，在有症状和无症状下肢上，评分者间信度ICC分别为0.927和0.792。在有症状下肢上，二维分析与视觉观察的同时效度ICC值，评分者A为0.96，评分者B为0.85。无症状下肢的同时效度ICC值，评分者A为0.95，评分者B为0.65。视觉观察时，有症状和无症状下肢的测量标准误（SEM）分别为3.898和3.258。使用Spark Motion Pro™应用程序时，有症状和无症状下肢的SEM分别为1.648和2.718。仅使用视觉观察时的最小可检测变化（MDC）为5.58和4.68。使用该应用程序时，有症状和无症状下肢的MDC分别为2.328和3.838。
本研究结果支持将二维移动应用程序用作测量有症状受试者膝外翻的可靠工具，与仅视觉观察相比（SEM = 3.898），其误差更小（SEM = 1.648）。
2B。
