Requena-Bueno Lara, Priego-Quesada Jose Ignacio, Jimenez-Perez Irene, Gil-Calvo Marina, Pérez-Soriano Pedro
Research Group in Sports Biomechanics (GIBD), Department of Physical Education and Sports, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Research Group in Sports Biomechanics (GIBD), Department of Physical Education and Sports, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain; Research Group in Medical Physics (GIFIME), Department of Physiology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
J Therm Biol. 2020 Aug;92:102639. doi: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2020.102639. Epub 2020 Jul 3.
The aim of the study was to evaluate an automatic thermographic software package (ThermoHuman®) for assessing skin temperature on the soles of the feet before and after running and to compare it with two manual definitions of the regions of interest (ROIs). 120 thermal images of the soles of the feet of 30 participants, at two measurement points (before and after running 30 min) and on two measurement days were analyzed. Three different models of thermographic image analyses were used to obtain the mean temperature of 9 ROIs: A) ThermoHuman (automatic definition of ROIs using ThermoHuman® software), B) Manual (manual delimitation of ROIs by proportion criteria), and C) Manual-TH (manual delimitation of ROIs in an attempt to replicate the regions analyzed by ThermoHuman). ThermoHuman resulted in an 86% reduction in time involved compared to manual delimitation. Fourteen of the 120 images (12%) presented some error in one or more of the ROI delimitations. Although the three procedures presented significant differences between them (53% in the comparison between ThermoHuman and Manual, 47% between ThermoHuman and Manual-TH, and 28% between Manual and Manual-TH), all differences had a small effect size (ES 0.2-0.4) or lower (ES < 0.2). Bland-Altman plots showed similar 95% limits of agreement between the three procedures before and after running. Intraclass correlation coefficient analysis of the three procedures presented excellent reliability (ICC>0.8). In conclusion, ThermoHuman® software was observed to be time-saving for image analysis with excellent reliability. Although results suggest that ThermoHuman® and manual methods are both valid in themselves, combining them is not recommended due to the differences observed between them.
本研究的目的是评估一种自动热成像软件包（ThermoHuman®），用于在跑步前后评估脚底皮肤温度，并将其与两种手动定义的感兴趣区域（ROI）进行比较。分析了30名参与者在两个测量点（跑步前和跑步30分钟后）以及两个测量日的120张脚底热图像。使用三种不同的热成像图像分析模型来获取9个ROI的平均温度：A）ThermoHuman（使用ThermoHuman®软件自动定义ROI），B）手动（按比例标准手动划定ROI），以及C）手动 - TH（手动划定ROI以试图复制ThermoHuman分析的区域）。与手动划定相比，ThermoHuman使所需时间减少了86%。120张图像中有14张（12%）在一个或多个ROI划定中出现了一些误差。尽管这三种方法之间存在显著差异（ThermoHuman与手动方法之间为53%，ThermoHuman与手动 - TH之间为47%，手动与手动 - TH之间为28%），但所有差异的效应大小都较小（ES 0.2 - 0.4）或更低（ES < 0.2）。Bland - Altman图显示，在跑步前后，这三种方法之间的95%一致性界限相似。这三种方法的组内相关系数分析显示出极好的可靠性（ICC>0.8）。总之，观察到ThermoHuman®软件在图像分析方面节省时间且可靠性极佳。尽管结果表明ThermoHuman®和手动方法本身都是有效的，但由于观察到它们之间存在差异，不建议将它们结合使用。
