Padmore C, Langohr G D, Suh N, Johnson J A
Biomedical Engineering, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Biomedical Engineering, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada; Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
J Biomech. 2020 Aug 26;109:109881. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.109881. Epub 2020 Jun 18.
Three-dimensional motion analysis of the hand and wrist is common in in-vitro and in-vivo biomechanical research. However, all studies rely on post testing analysis, where anatomical joint coordinate systems (JCS) are created to generate clinically relevant data to describe wrist motion. The purpose of this study was to present a comparison of four JCS that have been previously described in literature. Five cadaveric upper limbs were passively cycled through a flexion-extension and radial-ulnar deviation motion pathways using a wrist motion simulator. During testing, clinical wrist angle was measured using a goniometer. Following testing, wrist angle was calculated using four previously described methods of generating wrist coordinate systems, to facilitate their comparison. For flexion-extension wrist motion, only subtle difference between JCSs were detected. When comparing the performance of each JCS to the measured wrist angle during flexion-extension wrist motion, the RMSE for all three analyzed axes were all within 6.6°. For radial-ulnar deviation wrist motion, again only subtle difference between JCSs were detected. When comparing the performance of each JCS to the measured wrist angle during radial-ulnar deviation wrist motion, the RMSE for all three analyzed axes were all within 7.1°. The results of this coordinate system comparison do not favor one JCS generation method over another, as all were found to be similar and the small differences that were found are likely not clinically significant. We support using any of the analyzed coordinate system generation methods; however, a practical advantage of using certain methods is that the required digitized points to form the coordinate systems are palpable on the skin's surface.
手部和腕部的三维运动分析在体外和体内生物力学研究中很常见。然而，所有研究都依赖于测试后分析，即创建解剖关节坐标系（JCS）以生成描述腕部运动的临床相关数据。本研究的目的是比较文献中先前描述的四种JCS。使用腕部运动模拟器，对五个尸体上肢进行被动循环，使其通过屈伸和桡尺偏斜运动路径。在测试过程中，使用角度计测量临床腕部角度。测试后，使用四种先前描述的生成腕部坐标系的方法计算腕部角度，以便于比较。对于腕部屈伸运动，仅检测到JCS之间的细微差异。在将每个JCS的性能与腕部屈伸运动期间测量的腕部角度进行比较时，所有三个分析轴的均方根误差（RMSE）均在6.6°以内。对于腕部桡尺偏斜运动，同样仅检测到JCS之间的细微差异。在将每个JCS的性能与腕部桡尺偏斜运动期间测量的腕部角度进行比较时，所有三个分析轴的RMSE均在7.1°以内。这种坐标系比较的结果并不表明一种JCS生成方法优于另一种，因为所有方法都被发现相似，并且发现的微小差异可能在临床上不具有显著性。我们支持使用任何一种分析的坐标系生成方法；然而，使用某些方法的一个实际优势是，形成坐标系所需的数字化点在皮肤表面是可触及的。
