The Validity and Usability of Markerless Motion Capture and Inertial Measurement Units for Quantifying Dynamic Movements

被引:0
作者
Edwards, Nathan a. [1 ,2 ]
Caccese, Jaclyn b. [1 ,2 ]
Tracy, Ryan e. [2 ]
Hagen, Joshua [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Quatman-yates, Catherine c. [2 ]
Onate, James [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Human Performance Collaborat, Columbus, OH USA
[2] Ohio State Univ, Sch Hlth & Rehabil Sci, Columbus, OH USA
[3] Ohio State Univ, Integrated Syst Engn, Columbus, OH USA
关键词
BIOMECHANICS; KINEMATICS; MOTION ANALYSIS; MOVEMENT ASSESSMENT; WEARABLE SENSORS; JOINT COORDINATE SYSTEM; ISB RECOMMENDATION; CENTER LOCATION; LOWER-EXTREMITY; GAIT; HIP; RELIABILITY; KNEE; DEFINITIONS; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1249/MSS.0000000000003579
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
PurposeMotion capture technology is quickly evolving, providing researchers, clinicians, and coaches with more access to biomechanics data. Markerless motion capture and inertial measurement units (IMUs) are continually developing biomechanics tools that need validation for dynamic movements before widespread use in applied settings. This study evaluated the validity of a markerless motion capture, IMU, and red, green, blue, and depth (RGBD) camera system as compared with marker-based motion capture during countermovement jumps, overhead squats, lunges, and runs with cuts.MethodsThirty adults were recruited for this study (sex: 18 females, 12 males; age: 25.4 +/- 8.6 yrs; height: 1.71 +/- 0.08 m; weight: 71.6 +/- 11.5 kg). Data were collected simultaneously with four motion capture technologies (i.e., Vicon, marker-based; Theia/Optitrack, markerless; APDM Opals, IMUs; and Vald HumanTrak, RGBD camera). System validity for lower and upper body joint angles was evaluated using bias, root mean squared error (RMSE), precision, maximum absolute error, and intraclass correlation coefficients. System usability was descriptively analyzed.ResultsOverall, markerless motion capture had the highest validity (sagittal plane RMSE: 3.20 degrees-15.66 degrees; frontal plane RMSE: 2.12 degrees-9.14 degrees; transverse plane RMSE: 3.160 degrees-56.61 degrees), followed by the IMU system (sagittal plane RMSE: 8.11 degrees-28.37 degrees; frontal plane RMSE: 3.26 degrees-16.98 degrees; transverse plane RMSE: 5.08 degrees-116.75 degrees), and lastly the RGBD system (sagittal plane bias: 0.55 degrees-129.48 degrees; frontal plane bias: 1.35 degrees-52.06 degrees).ConclusionsMarkerless motion capture and IMUs have moderate validity for joint kinematics, whereas the RGBD system did not have adequate validity. Markerless systems have lower data processing time, require moderate technical expertise, but have high data storage size. IMUs are easier to use, can collect data in any location, but require participant set-up. Overall, individuals using motion capture should consider the specific movements, testing locations, and technical expertise available before selecting a system.
引用
收藏
页码:641 / 655
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Inertial Measurement Units for Clinical Movement Analysis: Reliability and Concurrent Validity
    Al-Amri, Mohammad
    Nicholas, Kevin
    Button, Kate
    Sparkes, Valerie
    Sheeran, Liba
    Davies, Jennifer L.
    SENSORS, 2018, 18 (03):
  • [2] Validity of inertial measurement units for tracking human motion: a systematic review
    Ghattas, John
    Jarvis, Danielle N.
    SPORTS BIOMECHANICS, 2021, : 1853 - 1866
  • [3] Validity of Markerless Motion Capture System and Its Correlation with Physical Characteristics for Hip Range of Motion Measurement: A Pilot Study
    Bak, Se-Young
    Ahn, Junghoon
    Choi, Hongtaek
    Lee, Seunghee
    Lim, Wootaek
    Kim, Hyeong-Dong
    SENSORS AND MATERIALS, 2025, 37 (03) : 965 - 976
  • [4] Markerless motion capture estimates of lower extremity kinematics and kinetics are comparable to marker-based across 8 movements
    Song, Ke
    Hullfish, Todd J.
    Silva, Rodrigo Scattone
    Silbernagel, Karin Gravare
    Baxter, Josh R.
    JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 2023, 157
  • [5] Validity and Consistency of Concurrent Extraction of Gait Features Using Inertial Measurement Units and Motion Capture System
    Anwary, Arif Reza
    Yu, Hongnian
    Callaway, Andrew
    Vassallo, Michael
    IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, 2021, 21 (02) : 1625 - 1634
  • [6] The validity of using inertial measurement units to monitor the torso and pelvis sagittal plane motion of elite rowers
    Brice, Sara M.
    Millett, Emma L.
    Philippa, Bronson
    JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES, 2022, 40 (08) : 950 - 958
  • [7] In Vivo Measurement of Wrist Movements during the Dart-Throwing Motion Using Inertial Measurement Units
    Fischer, Gabriella
    Wirth, Michael Alexander
    Balocco, Simone
    Calcagni, Maurizio
    SENSORS, 2021, 21 (16)
  • [8] Comparing inertial measurement units and marker-based biomechanical models during dynamic rotation of the torso
    Brice, Sara M.
    Phillips, Elissa J.
    Millett, Emma L.
    Hunter, Adam
    Philippa, Bronson
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPORT SCIENCE, 2020, 20 (06) : 767 - 775
  • [9] Validation of inertial measurement units with an optoelectronic system for whole-body motion analysis
    Robert-Lachaine, Xavier
    Mecheri, Hakim
    Larue, Christian
    Plamondon, Andre
    MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERING & COMPUTING, 2017, 55 (04) : 609 - 619
  • [10] Validity of time series kinematical data as measured by a markerless motion capture system on a flatland for gait assessment
    Tanaka, Ryo
    Takimoto, Haruka
    Yamasaki, Takahiro
    Higashi, Ariaki
    JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 2018, 71 : 281 - 285