AI Article Synopsis

  • Gait analysis depends heavily on accurately placing anatomical markers; errors in this process can lead to variable results in gait data.
  • This study aimed to assess how precise the placement of these markers is on the lower limbs and how this precision affects kinematic measurements.
  • Findings indicated that while some kinematic measurements are reliable with varying precision based on evaluators' experience, there's no direct link between the accuracy of marker placement and the consistency of kinematic data.

Article Abstract

Background: Gait analysis relies on the accurate and precise identification of anatomical landmarks to provide reliable and reproducible data. More specifically, the precision of marker placement among repeated measurements is responsible for increased variability in the output gait data.

Research Question: The objective of this study was to quantify the precision of marker placement on the lower limbs by a test-retest procedure and to investigate its propagation to kinematic data.

Methods: The protocol was tested on a cohort of eight asymptomatic adults involving four evaluators, with different levels of experience. Each evaluator performed, three repeated marker placements for each participant. The standard deviation was used to calculate the precision of the marker placement, the precision of the orientation of the anatomical (segment) coordinate systems, and the precision of the lower limb kinematics. In addition, one-way ANOVA was used to compare the intra-evaluator marker placement precision and kinematic precisions among the different levels of the evaluator's experience. Finally, a Pearson correlation between marker placement precision and kinematic precision was analyzed.

Results: Results have shown a precision of skin markers within 10 mm and 12 mm for intra-evaluator and inter-evaluator, respectively. Analysis of kinematic data showed good to moderate reliability for all parameters apart from hip and knee rotation that demonstrated poor intra- and inter-evaluator precision. Inter-trial variability was observed reduced than intra- and inter-evaluator variability. Moreover, experience had a positive impact on kinematic reliability since evaluators with higher experience showed a statistically significant increase in precision for most kinematic parameters. However, no correlation was observed between marker placement precision and kinematic precision which indicates that an error in the placement of one specific marker can be compensated or enhanced, in a non-linear way, by an error in the placement of other markers.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.05.028DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

marker placement
28
placement precision
20
precision kinematic
16
precision
14
precision marker
12
marker
9
placement
9
lower limb
8
kinematic precision
8
intra- inter-evaluator
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!