Moore Kevin D, Hawke Ashley L, Carey Robert E, Wu John Z, Breloff Scott P
Health Effects Laboratory Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1095 Willowdale Rd., Morgantown West Virginia 26505, USA.
J Mech Med Biol. 2023 Jan 28;23(3). doi: 10.1142/s021951942350015x.
The anterior and posterior iliac spine markers frequently used to define the pelvis, are commonly occluded during three-dimensional (3D) motion capture. The occlusion of these markers leads to the use of various tracking marker configurations on the pelvis, which affect kinematic results. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the agreement of CODA pelvis kinematic results when two different tracking marker configurations were used during roofing tasks. 3D motion data were collected on seven male subjects while mimicking two roofing tasks. Hip joint angles (HJAs) were computed using the CODA pelvis with two different tracking marker configurations, the trochanter tracking method (TTM), and virtual pelvis tracking method (VPTM). Agreement between tracking marker configurations was assessed using cross-correlations, bivariate correlations, mean absolute differences (MADs), and Bland-Altman (BA) plots. The correlations displayed no time lag and strong agreement (all > 0.83) between the HJA from the VPTM and TTM, suggesting the timing occurrence of variables are comparable between the two tracking marker configurations. The MAD between the VPTM and TTM displayed magnitude differences, but most of the differences were within a clinically acceptable range. Caution should still be used when comparing kinematic results between various tracking marker configurations, as differences exist.
常用于定义骨盆的髂前上棘和髂后上棘标记物,在三维(3D)运动捕捉过程中常常会被遮挡。这些标记物的遮挡导致在骨盆上使用各种跟踪标记配置,这会影响运动学结果。本研究的目的是检验在屋面作业期间使用两种不同的跟踪标记配置时,CODA骨盆运动学结果的一致性。在七名男性受试者模拟两项屋面作业时收集了3D运动数据。使用具有两种不同跟踪标记配置的CODA骨盆、转子跟踪方法(TTM)和虚拟骨盆跟踪方法(VPTM)计算髋关节角度(HJA)。使用互相关、双变量相关、平均绝对差(MAD)和布兰德-奥特曼(BA)图评估跟踪标记配置之间的一致性。相关性显示VPTM和TTM的HJA之间没有时间滞后且一致性很强(均>0.83),这表明两种跟踪标记配置之间变量的发生时间具有可比性。VPTM和TTM之间的MAD显示出量级差异,但大多数差异在临床可接受范围内。在比较各种跟踪标记配置之间的运动学结果时仍应谨慎,因为存在差异。