Which method should we use to determine the hip joint center location in individuals with a high amount of soft tissue?

IF 1.4 3区医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL

Clinical Biomechanics Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106254

Brian Horsak , Sebastian Durstberger , Philipp Krondorfer , Alexandra Thajer , Susanne Greber-Platzer , Andreas Kranzl

{"title":"Which method should we use to determine the hip joint center location in individuals with a high amount of soft tissue?","authors":"Brian Horsak , Sebastian Durstberger , Philipp Krondorfer , Alexandra Thajer , Susanne Greber-Platzer , Andreas Kranzl","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>This study investigated the most accurate method for estimating the hip joint center position in clinical 3D gait analysis for young individuals with high amounts of soft tissue. We compared position estimates of five regression-based and two functional methods to the hip joint center position obtained through 3D free-hand ultrasound.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>For this purpose, the data of 14 overweight or obese individuals with a mean age of 13.6 (SD 2.1 yrs) and a BMI of 36.5 (SD 7.1 kg/m<sup>2</sup>, range 26–52 kg/m<sup>2</sup>) who underwent standard clinical 3D gait analysis were used. The data of each participant were processed with five regression-based and two functional methods and compared to the hip joint center identified via 3D free-hand ultrasound.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>The absolute location errors to 3D free-hand ultrasound for each anatomical plane and the Euclidean distances served as outcomes next to their effects on gait variables. The data suggest that regression-based methods are preferable to functional methods in this population, as the latter demonstrated the highest variability in accuracy with large errors for some individuals.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Based on our findings we recommend using the regression method presented by Hara et al. due to its superior overall accuracy of <9 mm on average in all planes and the lowest impact on kinematic and kinetic output variables. We do not recommend using the Harrington equations (single and multiple) in populations with high amounts of soft tissue as they require pelvic depth as input, which can be massively biased when a lot of soft tissue is present around the pelvis.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50992,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biomechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026800332400086X/pdfft?md5=c38cb7173859bcd2b85a490afca21fef&pid=1-s2.0-S026800332400086X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026800332400086X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

This study investigated the most accurate method for estimating the hip joint center position in clinical 3D gait analysis for young individuals with high amounts of soft tissue. We compared position estimates of five regression-based and two functional methods to the hip joint center position obtained through 3D free-hand ultrasound.

Methods

For this purpose, the data of 14 overweight or obese individuals with a mean age of 13.6 (SD 2.1 yrs) and a BMI of 36.5 (SD 7.1 kg/m², range 26–52 kg/m²) who underwent standard clinical 3D gait analysis were used. The data of each participant were processed with five regression-based and two functional methods and compared to the hip joint center identified via 3D free-hand ultrasound.

Findings

The absolute location errors to 3D free-hand ultrasound for each anatomical plane and the Euclidean distances served as outcomes next to their effects on gait variables. The data suggest that regression-based methods are preferable to functional methods in this population, as the latter demonstrated the highest variability in accuracy with large errors for some individuals.

Interpretation

Based on our findings we recommend using the regression method presented by Hara et al. due to its superior overall accuracy of <9 mm on average in all planes and the lowest impact on kinematic and kinetic output variables. We do not recommend using the Harrington equations (single and multiple) in populations with high amounts of soft tissue as they require pelvic depth as input, which can be massively biased when a lot of soft tissue is present around the pelvis.

查看原文本刊更多论文

我们应该使用哪种方法来确定软组织较多的人的髋关节中心位置？

背景本研究探讨了在临床三维步态分析中估计软组织较多的年轻人髋关节中心位置的最准确方法。为此，我们使用了 14 名超重或肥胖者的数据，他们的平均年龄为 13.6 岁（SD 2.1 岁），体重指数为 36.5（SD 7.1 kg/m2，范围为 26-52 kg/m2），并接受了标准临床三维步态分析。研究结果每个解剖平面与三维徒手超声波的绝对位置误差和欧氏距离作为其对步态变量影响的结果。数据表明，在这一人群中，基于回归的方法优于功能性方法，因为后者在准确性方面表现出最大的可变性，对某些个体而言误差较大。解释根据我们的研究结果，我们建议使用 Hara 等人提出的回归方法，因为该方法在所有平面的平均准确性为 9 mm，总体准确性较高，对运动学和运动输出变量的影响最小。我们不建议在有大量软组织的人群中使用 Harrington 方程（单一和多重），因为它们需要将骨盆深度作为输入，而当骨盆周围有大量软组织时，这可能会产生严重偏差。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Clinical Biomechanics 医学-工程：生物医学

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

5.60%

发文量

189

审稿时长

12.3 weeks

期刊介绍： Clinical Biomechanics is an international multidisciplinary journal of biomechanics with a focus on medical and clinical applications of new knowledge in the field. The science of biomechanics helps explain the causes of cell, tissue, organ and body system disorders, and supports clinicians in the diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment methods and technologies. Clinical Biomechanics aims to strengthen the links between laboratory and clinic by publishing cutting-edge biomechanics research which helps to explain the causes of injury and disease, and which provides evidence contributing to improved clinical management. A rigorous peer review system is employed and every attempt is made to process and publish top-quality papers promptly. Clinical Biomechanics explores all facets of body system, organ, tissue and cell biomechanics, with an emphasis on medical and clinical applications of the basic science aspects. The role of basic science is therefore recognized in a medical or clinical context. The readership of the journal closely reflects its multi-disciplinary contents, being a balance of scientists, engineers and clinicians. The contents are in the form of research papers, brief reports, review papers and correspondence, whilst special interest issues and supplements are published from time to time. Disciplines covered include biomechanics and mechanobiology at all scales, bioengineering and use of tissue engineering and biomaterials for clinical applications, biophysics, as well as biomechanical aspects of medical robotics, ergonomics, physical and occupational therapeutics and rehabilitation.