0
research-article

Operator bias errors are reduced using standing marker alignment device for repeated visit studies

[+] Author and Article Information
Laura Hutchinson

Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering & Human Mobility Research Centre, Queen’s University Kingston, ON, 130 Stuart Street, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6
laura.hutchinson@queensu.ca

Joel B Schwartz

Sproutel, 60 Valley St Ste 105, Providence, RI 02909
joelbschwartz@gmail.com

Amy M. Morton

Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering & Human Mobility Research Centre, Queen’s University Kingston, ON, 130 Stuart Street, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6
amy_morton1@brown.edu

Irene S. Davis

Spaulding National Running Centre, Harvard Medical School, Spaulding-Cambridge Outpatient Center, 1575 Cambridge St., Cambridge, MA 02138
mcclay@udel.edu

Kevin Deluzio

Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering & Human Mobility Research Centre, Queen’s University Kingston, ON, 130 Stuart Street, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6
kevin.deluzio@queensu.ca

Michael J Rainbow

Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering & Human Mobility Research Centre, Queen’s University Kingston, ON, 130 Stuart Street, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6
michael.rainbow@queensu.ca

1Corresponding author.

ASME doi:10.1115/1.4038358 History: Received April 25, 2017; Revised October 28, 2017

Abstract

When optical motion capture is used for motion analysis, reflective markers or a digitizer are typically used to record the location of anatomical landmarks identified through palpation. The landmarks are then used to construct anatomical coordinate systems. Failure to consistently identify landmarks through palpation over repeat tests creates artifacts in the kinematic waveforms. The purpose of this work was to improve intra- and inter-rater reliability in determining anatomical landmarks and the associated anatomical coordinate systems using a Marker Alignment Device. The device aids the subject in recreating the same standing posture over multiple tests, and recreates the anatomical landmarks from previous static calibration trials. We tested three different raters who identified landmarks on eleven subjects. The subjects performed walking trials and their gait kinematics were analyzed with and without the device. Ankle kinematics were not improved by the device suggesting manual palpation over repeat visits is just as effective as the Marker Alignment Device. Intra-class correlation coefficients between gait kinematics registered to the reference static trial and registered to follow-up static trials with and without the device were improved between 1% and 33% when the device was used. Importantly, out of plane hip and knee kinematics showed the greatest improvements in repeatability. These results suggest that the device is well suited to reducing palpation artifact during repeat visits to the gait lab.

Copyright (c) 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In