Suppr超能文献

双平面视频放射成像与光学运动捕捉用于足踝关节运动学的直接比较

A Direct Comparison of Biplanar Videoradiography and Optical Motion Capture for Foot and Ankle Kinematics.

作者信息

Kessler Sarah E, Rainbow Michael J, Lichtwark Glen A, Cresswell Andrew G, D'Andrea Susan E, Konow Nicolai, Kelly Luke A

机构信息

Centre of Sensorimotor Performance, School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Skeletal Observation Laboratory, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2019 Aug 23;7:199. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00199. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Measuring motion of the human foot presents a unique challenge due to the large number of closely packed bones with congruent articulating surfaces. Optical motion capture (OMC) and multi-segment models can be used to infer foot motion, but might be affected by soft tissue artifact (STA). Biplanar videoradiography (BVR) is a relatively new tool that allows direct, non-invasive measurement of bone motion using high-speed, dynamic x-ray images to track individual bones. It is unknown whether OMC and BVR can be used interchangeably to analyse multi-segment foot motion. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the agreement in kinematic measures of dynamic activities. Nine healthy participants performed three walking and three running trials while BVR was recorded with synchronous OMC. Bone position and orientation was determined through manual scientific-rotoscoping. The OMC and BVR kinematics were co-registered to the same coordinate system, and BVR tracking was used to create virtual markers for comparison to OMC during dynamic trials. Root mean square (RMS) differences in marker positions and joint angles as well as a linear fit method (LFM) was used to compare the outputs of both methods. When comparing BVR and OMC, sagittal plane angles were in good agreement (ankle: R = 0.947, 0.939; Medial Longitudinal Arch (MLA) Angle: R = 0.713, 0.703, walking and running, respectively). When examining the ankle, there was a moderate agreement between the systems in the frontal plane (R = 0.322, 0.452, walking and running, respectively), with a weak to moderate correlation for the transverse plane (R = 0.178, 0.326, walking and running, respectively). However, root mean squared error (RMSE) showed angular errors ranging from 1.06 to 8.31° across the planes (frontal: 3.57°, 3.67°, transverse: 4.28°, 4.70°, sagittal: 2.45°, 2.67°, walking and running, respectively). Root mean square (RMS) differences between OMC and BVR marker trajectories were task dependent with the largest differences in the shank (6.0 ± 2.01 mm) for running, and metatarsals (3.97 ± 0.81 mm) for walking. Based on the results, we suggest BVR and OMC provide comparable solutions to foot motion in the sagittal plane, however, interpretations of out-of-plane movement should be made carefully.

摘要

由于人脚有大量紧密排列且关节面相互吻合的骨骼,测量人脚的运动面临着独特的挑战。光学运动捕捉(OMC)和多节段模型可用于推断足部运动,但可能会受到软组织伪影(STA)的影响。双平面视频X线摄影(BVR)是一种相对较新的工具,它可以通过高速动态X线图像直接、非侵入性地测量骨骼运动,以追踪单个骨骼。尚不清楚OMC和BVR是否可以互换使用来分析多节段足部运动。因此,本研究的目的是确定动态活动运动学测量的一致性。九名健康参与者进行了三次步行和三次跑步试验,同时记录BVR并同步进行OMC。通过手动科学逐帧跟踪确定骨骼位置和方向。将OMC和BVR运动学数据配准到同一坐标系中,并使用BVR跟踪创建虚拟标记,以便在动态试验中与OMC进行比较。使用标记位置和关节角度的均方根(RMS)差异以及线性拟合方法(LFM)来比较两种方法的输出。比较BVR和OMC时,矢状面角度一致性良好(踝关节:R = 0.947、0.939;内侧纵弓(MLA)角度:R = 0.713、0.703,分别对应步行和跑步)。检查踝关节时,两个系统在额状面的一致性中等(R = 0.322、0.452,分别对应步行和跑步),在横断面的相关性较弱至中等(R = 0.178、0.326,分别对应步行和跑步)。然而,均方根误差(RMSE)显示各平面的角度误差范围为1.06至8.31°(额状面:3.57°、3.67°,横断面:4.28°、4.70°,矢状面:2.45°、2.67°,分别对应步行和跑步)。OMC和BVR标记轨迹之间的均方根(RMS)差异取决于任务,跑步时小腿的差异最大(6.0±2.01 mm),步行时跖骨的差异最大(3.97±0.81 mm)。基于这些结果,我们认为BVR和OMC在矢状面为足部运动提供了可比的解决方案,然而,对于平面外运动的解释应谨慎进行。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dfbf/6716496/ac113f23d462/fbioe-07-00199-g0001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验