Schneemann Lisa, Linnhoff Dagmar, Wollesen Bettina, Mattes Klaus, Albertsen Inke Marie
Department of Sport and Movement Science, University Hamburg, Turmweg 2, Hamburg 20148, Germany; Therapy and Training Centre, Movement lab, Schön Klinik Hamburg Eilbek, Dehnhaide 120, Hamburg 22081, Germany.
Department of Sport and Movement Science, University Hamburg, Turmweg 2, Hamburg 20148, Germany.
Gait Posture. 2025 Sep;121:129-134. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2025.04.035. Epub 2025 May 1.
Marker-based motion capture is widely used in clinical gait analysis, but errors due to incorrect marker placement can impact kinematic results. When using the Plug-in Gait model (PiG, Vicon, Oxford, UK) the virtual Knee Alignment Device (vKAD, Prophysics, Kloten, Switzerland) is designed to automatically correct marker displacements on the lateral shank and femur. However, the impact of lateral knee marker displacement on gait kinematics using vKAD has not been studied.
Does systematic lateral knee marker displacement have a significant effect on the maximum angles of the knee (sagittal, frontal, transverse) and hip joint (transverse) during swing phase when using PiG and vKAD?
Twelve healthy adults (27.9 ± 7 years, 173.1 ± 9 cm, 68.9 ± 7 kg) underwent gait analysis using PiG and vKAD in five marker placement conditions of the lateral knee marker on both legs. Conditions included the correct anatomical position (reference) and systematic displacements of 1 cm and 2 cm anterior/posterior to the reference. A two-way repeated ANOVA compared maximum joint angles of the knee (sagittal, frontal, transverse) and hip (transverse) during the swing phase between conditions.
All selected joint angles were significantly affected by the marker placement conditions. A 2 cm displacement to the reference position resulted in the following kinematic deviations: hip internal rotation 7°/-11°, knee flexion 2°/-4°, knee varus/adduction 7°/-8°, and knee internal rotation 1°/-4°.
Even a 1 cm anterior displacement of the lateral knee marker led to an unphysiological knee varus range of motion in the swing phase, overestimation hip internal rotation. These findings have practical implications for researchers and clinicians as they can serve to optimize the knee joint axis and enhancing accuracy of instrumental gait analysis. Improved accuracy, particularly in hip rotation, is crucial for clinicans working with patients like those with cerebral palsy.
基于标记点的运动捕捉在临床步态分析中被广泛应用,但标记点放置不正确所导致的误差会影响运动学结果。在使用插件式步态模型(PiG,Vicon公司,英国牛津)时,虚拟膝关节对线装置(vKAD,Prophysics公司,瑞士克洛滕)旨在自动校正小腿外侧和股骨上标记点的位移。然而,使用vKAD时外侧膝关节标记点位移对步态运动学的影响尚未得到研究。
当使用PiG和vKAD时,系统性的外侧膝关节标记点位移在摆动期对膝关节(矢状面、额状面、横断面)和髋关节(横断面)的最大角度是否有显著影响?
12名健康成年人(27.9±7岁,173.1±9厘米,68.9±7千克)在双腿外侧膝关节标记点的五种放置条件下使用PiG和vKAD进行步态分析。这些条件包括正确的解剖位置(参考)以及相对于参考位置在前后方向上1厘米和2厘米的系统性位移。采用双向重复方差分析比较各条件下摆动期膝关节(矢状面、额状面、横断面)和髋关节(横断面)的最大关节角度。
所有选定的关节角度均受到标记点放置条件的显著影响。相对于参考位置2厘米的位移导致以下运动学偏差:髋关节内旋7°/-11°,膝关节屈曲2°/-4°,膝关节内翻/内收7°/-8°,以及膝关节内旋1°/-4°。
即使外侧膝关节标记点向前位移1厘米也会导致摆动期膝关节内翻运动范围不符合生理,高估髋关节内旋。这些发现对研究人员和临床医生具有实际意义,因为它们有助于优化膝关节轴线并提高仪器化步态分析的准确性。提高准确性,尤其是在髋关节旋转方面,对于治疗脑瘫等患者的临床医生至关重要。