Horsak B, Pobatschnig B, Schwab C, Baca A, Kranzl A, Kainz H
St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Health Sciences, St. Pölten, Austria.
Orthopaedic Hospital Vienna-Speising, Laboratory of Gait and Movement Analysis, Vienna, Austria.
Gait Posture. 2018 Oct;66:201-207. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.08.027. Epub 2018 Sep 1.
In recent years, the reliability of inverse (IK) and direct kinematic (DK) models in gait analysis have been assessed intensively, but mainly for lean populations. However, obesity is a growing issue. So far, the sparse results available for the reliability of clinical gait analysis in obese populations are limited to direct kinematic models. Reliability error-margins for inverse kinematic models in obese populations have not been reported yet.
Is there a difference in the reliability of IK models compared with a DK model in obese children? Are there any differences in the joint kinematic output between IK and DK models?
A test-retest study was conducted using three-dimensional gait analysis data from two obese female and eight obese male participants from an earlier study. Data were analyzed using a DK model and two OpenSim-based IK models. Test-retest reliability was compared by calculating the Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) along with similar absolute reliability measures. A Friedman Test was used to assess whether there were any significant differences in the reliability between the models. Kinematic output of the models was compared by using Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM).
No significant differences were found in the reliability between the DK and IK models. The SPM analysis indicated several significant differences between both IK models and the DK approach. Most of these differences were continuous offsets.
Reliability values showed clinically acceptable error-margins and were comparable between all models. Therefore, our results support the careful use of IK models in overweight or obese populations, e.g. for musculoskeletal modelling studies. The inconsistent kinematic output can mainly be explained by different model conventions and anatomical segment coordinate frame definitions.
近年来,人们对步态分析中逆运动学(IK)和直接运动学(DK)模型的可靠性进行了深入评估,但主要针对体型偏瘦的人群。然而,肥胖问题日益严重。到目前为止,肥胖人群临床步态分析可靠性的稀疏结果仅限于直接运动学模型。肥胖人群中逆运动学模型的可靠性误差范围尚未见报道。
在肥胖儿童中,IK模型与DK模型的可靠性是否存在差异?IK模型和DK模型之间的关节运动输出是否存在差异?
采用重测研究,使用来自早期一项研究的两名肥胖女性和八名肥胖男性参与者的三维步态分析数据。使用DK模型和两个基于OpenSim的IK模型对数据进行分析。通过计算测量标准误差(SEM)以及类似的绝对可靠性指标来比较重测可靠性。使用Friedman检验评估模型之间的可靠性是否存在显著差异。通过使用统计参数映射(SPM)比较模型的运动输出。
DK模型和IK模型之间的可靠性未发现显著差异。SPM分析表明,两个IK模型与DK方法之间存在几个显著差异。这些差异大多是连续偏移。
可靠性值显示出临床上可接受的误差范围,并且在所有模型之间具有可比性。因此,我们的结果支持在超重或肥胖人群中谨慎使用IK模型,例如用于肌肉骨骼建模研究。运动输出不一致主要可以通过不同的模型约定和解剖节段坐标框架定义来解释。