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
  • [41] Obesity-Specific Considerations for Assessing Gait with Inertial Measurement Unit-Based vs. Optokinetic Motion Capture
    Rekant, Julie
    Rothenberger, Scott
    Chambers, April
    SENSORS, 2024, 24 (04)
  • [42] Quantifying Stability Using Frequency Domain Data from Wireless Inertial Measurement Units
    Slaughter, Stephen
    Hales, Rachel
    Hinze, Cheryl
    Pfeiffer, Catherine
    WMSCI 2011: 15TH WORLD MULTI-CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMICS, CYBERNETICS AND INFORMATICS, VOL II, 2011, : 198 - 201
  • [43] Pilot Validation Study of Inertial Measurement Units and Markerless Methods for 3D Neck and Trunk Kinematics during a Simulated Surgery Task
    Zhang, Ce
    Greve, Christian
    Verkerke, Gijsbertus Jacob
    Roossien, Charlotte Christina
    Houdijk, Han
    Hijmans, Juha M.
    SENSORS, 2022, 22 (21)
  • [44] Validation of Pelvis and Trunk Range of Motion as Assessed Using Inertial Measurement Units
    Ali, Farwa
    Hogen, Cecilia A.
    Miller, Emily J.
    Kaufman, Kenton R.
    BIOENGINEERING-BASEL, 2024, 11 (07):
  • [45] Using Magneto-Inertial Measurement Units to Pervasively Measure Hip Joint Motion during Sports
    Horenstein, Rachel E.
    Goudeau, Yohann R.
    Lewis, Cara L.
    Shefelbine, Sandra J.
    SENSORS, 2020, 20 (17) : 1 - 19
  • [46] Validity of shoe-type inertial measurement units for Parkinson's disease patients during treadmill walking
    Lee, Myeounggon
    Youm, Changhong
    Jeon, Jeanhong
    Cheon, Sang-Myung
    Park, Hwayoung
    JOURNAL OF NEUROENGINEERING AND REHABILITATION, 2018, 15
  • [47] Comparison of scapular kinematics from optical motion capture and inertial measurement units during a work-related and functional task protocol
    Friesen, Kenzie B. B.
    Sigurdson, Anya
    Lang, Angelica E. E.
    MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERING & COMPUTING, 2023, 61 (06) : 1521 - 1531
  • [48] Accuracy of image data stream of a markerless motion capture system in determining the local dynamic stability and joint kinematics of human gait
    Chakraborty, Saikat
    Nandy, Anup
    Yamaguchi, Takazumi
    Bonnet, Vincent
    Venture, Gentiane
    JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 2020, 104
  • [49] Functional calibration does not improve the concurrent validity of magneto-inertial wearable sensor-based thorax and lumbar angle measurements when compared with retro-reflective motion capture
    Cottam, Daniel S.
    Campbell, Amity C.
    Davey, Paul C.
    Kent, Peter
    Elliott, Bruce C.
    Alderson, Jacqueline A.
    MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERING & COMPUTING, 2021, 59 (11-12) : 2253 - 2262
  • [50] Validity and Reliability of the Leomo Motion-Tracking Device Based on Inertial Measurement Unit with an Optoelectronic Camera System for Cycling Pedaling Evaluation
    Plaza-Bravo, Jose Manuel
    Mateo-March, Manuel
    Sanchis-Sanchis, Roberto
    Perez-Soriano, Pedro
    Zabala, Mikel
    Encarnacion-Martinez, Alberto
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 19 (14)