Suppr超能文献

Leap Motion 控制器与标准基于标记的运动捕捉系统的性能比较。

Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System.

机构信息

Optimization, Robotics and Biomechanics, Institute of Computer Engineering, Heidelberg University, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

Canada Excellence Chair in Human-Centred Robotics and Machine Intelligence, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada.

出版信息

Sensors (Basel). 2021 Mar 3;21(5):1750. doi: 10.3390/s21051750.

Abstract

Over the last few years, the Leap Motion Controller™ (LMC) has been increasingly used in clinical environments to track hand, wrist and forearm positions as an alternative to the gold-standard motion capture systems. Since the LMC is marker-less, portable, easy-to-use and low-cost, it is rapidly being adopted in healthcare services. This paper demonstrates the comparison of finger kinematic data between the LMC and a gold-standard marker-based motion capture system, Qualisys Track Manager (QTM). Both systems were time synchronised, and the participants performed abduction/adduction of the thumb and flexion/extension movements of all fingers. The LMC and QTM were compared in both static measuring finger segment lengths and dynamic flexion movements of all fingers. A Bland-Altman plot was used to demonstrate the performance of the LMC versus QTM with Pearson's correlation () to demonstrate trends in the data. Only the proximal interphalangeal joint (PIP) joint of the middle and ring finger during flexion/extension demonstrated acceptable agreement ( = 0.9062; = 0.8978), but with a high mean bias. In conclusion, the study shows that currently, the LMC is not suitable to replace gold-standard motion capture systems in clinical settings. Further studies should be conducted to validate the performance of the LMC as it is updated and upgraded.

摘要

在过去的几年中,Leap Motion Controller(LMC)越来越多地被用于临床环境中,以跟踪手部、手腕和前臂的位置,作为金标准运动捕捉系统的替代方案。由于 LMC 是无标记、便携式、易于使用且成本低廉的,因此它在医疗保健服务中正在迅速得到采用。本文展示了 LMC 和金标准基于标记的运动捕捉系统 Qualisys Track Manager(QTM)之间的手指运动学数据比较。两个系统都进行了时间同步,参与者进行了拇指外展/内收和所有手指的弯曲/伸展运动。比较了 LMC 和 QTM 在静态测量手指段长度和所有手指的动态弯曲运动中的表现。使用 Bland-Altman 图来演示 LMC 与 QTM 的性能,使用 Pearson 相关系数()来演示数据中的趋势。只有在弯曲/伸展过程中中指和无名指的近节指间关节(PIP)表现出可接受的一致性(=0.9062;=0.8978),但平均偏差较大。总之,该研究表明,目前,LMC 不适合在临床环境中替代金标准运动捕捉系统。应进一步进行研究,以验证 LMC 的性能,因为它正在不断更新和升级。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5a17/7959474/10568babcf88/sensors-21-01750-g001.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