Beange Kristen H E, Chan Adrian D C, Graham Ryan B
Department of Systems and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Design, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada; Ottawa-Carleton Institute for Biomedical Engineering, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Systems and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Design, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada; School of Human Kinetics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, 200 Lees Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada; Ottawa-Carleton Institute for Biomedical Engineering, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
J Biomech. 2025 Jan;179:112415. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112415. Epub 2024 Nov 3.
Inertial measurement units (IMUs) have the potential to facilitate a large influx of spine movement and motor control data to help stratify low back pain (LBP) diagnosis and care; however, uncertainties related to validity and equipment/movement reliability are preventing widespread use and acceptance. This study evaluated the concurrent validity of Xsens DOT IMUs relative to gold-standard optical motion capture equipment, and compared within- and between-day reliability of both systems to track spine range of motion (ROM) and movement quality (MQ) by evaluating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), coefficient of variation (CV), and minimum detectable difference (MDD). ROM was evaluated during planar ROM movements, and local dynamic stability (LDS; λ), mean absolute relative phase (MARP) and deviation phase (DP) were estimated from repetitive trunk flexion at 3 speeds, in 15 healthy controls to assess MQ. Results showed no statistically significant differences between systems for all metrics, and ICCs ≥ 0.86; therefore, validity was confirmed for tracking primary axis ROM and MQ. IMU data revealed that absolute (C7, T12, and S1) and relative (thoracic, lumbar, and total) ROM was the most reliable metric, followed by λ, DP, and MARP. Reliability was similar between systems, suggesting that the poorer between-day reliability (higher SEM and CV, lower ICC) observed is attributable to movement variability and sensor placement rather than equipment error. The MDDs can provide thresholds to researchers and clinicians for identifying changes in MQ. Further standardization of evaluated movements/metrics, and patient subgrouping are suggested to improve reliability assessments and refine MDDs in future work.
惯性测量单元（IMU）有潜力促进大量脊柱运动和运动控制数据的涌入，以帮助对腰痛（LBP）的诊断和护理进行分层；然而，与有效性以及设备/运动可靠性相关的不确定性阻碍了其广泛应用和接受。本研究评估了Xsens DOT IMU相对于金标准光学运动捕捉设备的同时效度，并通过评估组内相关系数（ICC）、测量标准误差（SEM）、变异系数（CV）和最小可检测差异（MDD），比较了两个系统在日内和日间追踪脊柱活动范围（ROM）和运动质量（MQ）的可靠性。在平面ROM运动期间评估ROM，并在15名健康对照者中以3种速度进行重复性躯干屈曲，估计局部动态稳定性（LDS；λ）、平均绝对相对相位（MARP）和偏差相位（DP），以评估MQ。结果显示，所有指标在两个系统之间均无统计学显著差异，且ICC≥0.86；因此，在追踪主轴ROM和MQ方面的效度得到了证实。IMU数据显示，绝对（C7、T12和S1）和相对（胸椎、腰椎和整体）ROM是最可靠的指标，其次是λ、DP和MARP。两个系统之间的可靠性相似，这表明观察到的较差的日间可靠性（较高的SEM和CV，较低的ICC）归因于运动变异性和传感器放置，而非设备误差。MDD可为研究人员和临床医生提供识别MQ变化的阈值。建议进一步规范评估的运动/指标，并对患者进行亚组划分，以在未来的工作中提高可靠性评估并完善MDD。
