Reliability and validity of 2-dimensional video analysis for a running task: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the reliability and validity of 2-dimensional (2D) video-based motion analysis during running.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, and IEEE Xplore was conducted in March 2020 and updated in May 2021. We included studies assessing reliability and/or validity of 2D video-based motion analysis (gold standard: 3D motion analysis) during running.

RESULTS

11 studies (251 runners; mean age range: 18.7-37.0 years; 57.4% female; 63.7% injury-free) met inclusion criteria. Eight studies examined kinematics of the pelvis/hip, eight of the knee, and six of the ankle/foot. Low-to-moderate risk of bias was present in all studies. Heterogeneous study designs, measurement methods, and statistical approaches across studies precluded statistical synthesis. Intrarater reliability [Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) range: 0.56-1.00; kappa range: 0.49-0.81] was better than interrater reliability (ICC range: 0.31-1.00; kappa range 0.00-0.85). ICC values for validity were poor to good (0.06-0.89). One study examining foot strike pattern found good to excellent validity (using Gwet AC statistics) when movement kinematics were categorized.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide range of methods were reported in 2D video-based motion analysis of joint angular kinematics during a running task. Further research to develop standardized 2D video-based motion analysis for running is needed. Categorizing movement patterns may be more useful than angularly quantifying joint kinematics.