Stappung Annie V, Espinoza Paulina M, Letelier Matilda J, Palma Felipe H
Laboratorio Integrativo de Biomecánica y Fisiología del Esfuerzo (LIBFE) Universidad de Los Andes, Chile.
Motion Center, Chile.
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2025 Aug 1;20(8):1176-1185. doi: 10.26603/001c.142061. eCollection 2025.
Running offers numerous health benefits, yet the prevalence of running-related injuries remains perfect. Evaluating running biomechanics through kinematic variables has gained attention due to their association with injuries. Currently, 3D video analysis is considered the gold standard, however, its complexity and cost limit widespread use. Consequently, 2D kinematic analysis using standard cameras has become popular, although research on its reliability is lacking. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the main kinematic variables of running, assessed categorically using 2D video analysis, in amateur runners aged 18 to 55 years.
A cross-sectional analytical observational study.
Thirty-three amateur runners aged 18-55 underwent evaluation. Reflective markers were placed on key anatomical landmarks of the dominant lower limb to enhance motion tracking in 2D video recordings from sagittal and posterior frontal planes. The videos were analyzed by three independent raters: a consensus group (four persons), a separate physical therapist, and an athletic trainer. Pairwise inter-rater agreement was assessed among all three raters using the Kappa coefficient. Nine categorical kinematic variables related to running biomechanics were assessed.
The variables that presented the greater concordance were the foot progression angle (K 0.847, 0.654, 0.792), heel whip (K 0.780, 0.847, 0.835), knee window (K 0.847, 0.847, 0.835) and overstriding (K 0.920, 0.780, 0.857). The variables with the lowest concordance were pelvic drop (K 0.257, 0.047, 0.597) and hindfoot eversion (K 0.604, 0.236, 0.604). Perfect concordance was obtained in seven of the nine variables between the consensus group and the physical therapist.
2D kinematic analysis exhibited promising reliability for specific running variables, suggesting its potential in clinical settings. However, its effectiveness depends on both the evaluated variables and the expertise of the evaluators.
Level 3.
跑步对健康有诸多益处，但与跑步相关的损伤发生率仍然很高。通过运动学变量评估跑步生物力学因其与损伤的关联而受到关注。目前，三维视频分析被认为是金标准，然而，其复杂性和成本限制了其广泛应用。因此，使用标准相机的二维运动学分析变得流行起来，尽管缺乏对其可靠性的研究。假设/目的：本研究的目的是评估在18至55岁的业余跑步者中，使用二维视频分析对跑步主要运动学变量进行分类评估的可靠性。
一项横断面分析观察性研究。
33名年龄在18 - 55岁的业余跑步者接受了评估。在优势下肢的关键解剖标志点放置反光标记，以增强矢状面和后额面二维视频记录中的运动跟踪。视频由三名独立评估者进行分析：一个共识小组（四人）、一名独立的物理治疗师和一名运动训练师。使用卡帕系数评估所有三名评估者之间的两两评估者一致性。评估了九个与跑步生物力学相关的分类运动学变量。
一致性较高的变量是足前进角（卡帕值分别为0.847、0.654、0.792）、足跟鞭打（卡帕值分别为0.780、0.847）、0.835、膝窗（卡帕值分别为0.847、0.847、0.835）和步幅过大（卡帕值分别为0.920、0.780、0.857）。一致性最低的变量是骨盆下降（卡帕值分别为0.257、0.047、0.597）和后足外翻（卡帕值分别为0.604、0.236、0.604）。在九个变量中的七个变量上，共识小组和物理治疗师之间获得了完全一致的结果。
二维运动学分析对特定跑步变量显示出有前景的可靠性，表明其在临床环境中的潜力。然而，其有效性取决于所评估的变量和评估者的专业知识。
3级。
