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
  • [31] Quantifying performance on an outdoor agility drill using foot-mounted inertial measurement units
    Zaferiou, Antonia M.
    Ojeda, Lauro
    Cain, Stephen M.
    Vitali, Rachel V.
    Davidson, Steven P.
    Stirling, Leia
    Perkins, Noel C.
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (11):
  • [32] The measurement of in vivo joint angles during a squat using a single camera markerless motion capture system as compared to a marker based system
    Schmitz, Anne
    Ye, Mao
    Boggess, Grant
    Shapiro, Robert
    Yang, Ruigang
    Noehren, Brian
    GAIT & POSTURE, 2015, 41 (02) : 694 - 698
  • [33] Measurement of Hand Joint Angle Using Inertial-Based Motion Capture System
    Lu, Chenghong
    Dai, Zeyang
    Jing, Lei
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, 2023, 72
  • [34] Quantifying jumps and external load in netball using VERT inertial measurement units
    Brooks, Edward R.
    Benson, Amanda C.
    Fox, Aaron S.
    Bruce, Lyndell M.
    SPORTS BIOMECHANICS, 2021, : 2209 - 2218
  • [35] Validity of Wearable Sensors at the Shoulder Joint: Combining Wireless Electromyography Sensors and Inertial Measurement Units to Perform Physical Workplace Assessments
    Poitras, Isabelle
    Bielmann, Mathieu
    Campeau-Lecours, Alexandre
    Mercier, Catherine
    Bouyer, Laurent J.
    Roy, Jean-Sebastien
    SENSORS, 2019, 19 (08):
  • [36] Classification of movements of collegiate female soccer players using inertial measurement units
    Masui, Yuki
    Hirotsu, Nobuyoshi
    Shimasaki, Yu
    Yoshimura, Masafumi
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART P-JOURNAL OF SPORTS ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, 2024,
  • [37] VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNITS FOR JUMP HEIGHT ESTIMATIONS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
    Clemente, Filipe Manuel
    Badicu, Georgian
    Hasan, Uday Ch.
    Akyildiz, Zeki
    Pino-Ortega, Jose
    Silva, Rui
    Rico-Gonzalez, Markel
    HUMAN MOVEMENT, 2022, 23 (04) : 1 - 20
  • [38] Validity of an inertial measurement unit for the assessment of range and quality of movement during head and thoracic spine movements
    Bellosta-Lopez, Pablo
    Simonsen, Morten Bilde
    Palsson, Thorvaldur Skuli
    Djurtoft, Chris
    Hirata, Rogerio Pessoto
    Christensen, Steffan Wittrup McPhee
    MUSCULOSKELETAL SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2023, 66
  • [39] Accuracy evaluation of two markerless motion capture systems for measurement of upper extremities: Kinect V2 and Captiv
    Steinebach, Tim
    Grosse, Eric H.
    Glock, Christoph H.
    Wakula, Jurij
    Lunin, Alexander
    HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS IN MANUFACTURING & SERVICE INDUSTRIES, 2020, 30 (04) : 291 - 302
  • [40] Validity of inertial measurement units in assessing segment angles and mechanical energies of elderly persons during sit-to-stand motion
    Hanawa, Hiroki
    Hirata, Keisuke
    Miyazawa, Taku
    Sonoo, Moeka
    Kubota, Keisuke
    Fujino, Tsutomu
    Kokubun, Takanori
    Kanemura, Naohiko
    2019 58TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE SOCIETY OF INSTRUMENT AND CONTROL ENGINEERS OF JAPAN (SICE), 2019, : 936 - 940