Concurrent validity of Protokinetics movement analysis software for estimated centre of mass displacement and velocity during walking

IF 2.2 3区医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES

Gait & posture Pub Date : 2024-10-28 DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2024.10.019

{"title":"Concurrent validity of Protokinetics movement analysis software for estimated centre of mass displacement and velocity during walking","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.gaitpost.2024.10.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The possibilities of out-of-lab gait analysis are ever increasing, with a recent development from Protokinetics movement analysis software (PKMAS) which, among other parameters, proposes an estimation of centre of mass (COMe) displacement. This measure can be useful in both clinical and sports performance environments.</div></div><div><h3>Research question</h3><div>Does PKMAS provide an accurate estimation of the COM displacement and velocity?</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Fifteen participants completed 10 walking trials over the Zeno™ Walkway while simultaneously being equipped with a full-body marker set for VICON analysis. The antero-posterior and medio-lateral COMe displacement components from PKMAS were compared with the projected 3D COM obtained from marker tracking using Bland-Altman analyses and Lin’s concordance coefficient. COM velocity was also calculated from the estimated displacement data from PKMAS.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Results demonstrated a high mean bias in both the anteroposterior (AP) and mediolateral (ML) directions for COMe displacement. COMe velocity showed low mean bias but high limits of agreement and low precision. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient showed good to excellent agreement in the AP direction for velocity and displacement, respectively; poor agreement was seen in the ML direction.</div></div><div><h3>Significance</h3><div>Based on these observations, the COMe proposed by the Protokinetics software does not produce accurate results and is to be used with caution in healthy subjects; it is not recommended for subjects presenting pathological gait.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12496,"journal":{"name":"Gait & posture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gait & posture","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966636224006490","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The possibilities of out-of-lab gait analysis are ever increasing, with a recent development from Protokinetics movement analysis software (PKMAS) which, among other parameters, proposes an estimation of centre of mass (COMe) displacement. This measure can be useful in both clinical and sports performance environments.

Research question

Does PKMAS provide an accurate estimation of the COM displacement and velocity?

Methods

Fifteen participants completed 10 walking trials over the Zeno™ Walkway while simultaneously being equipped with a full-body marker set for VICON analysis. The antero-posterior and medio-lateral COMe displacement components from PKMAS were compared with the projected 3D COM obtained from marker tracking using Bland-Altman analyses and Lin’s concordance coefficient. COM velocity was also calculated from the estimated displacement data from PKMAS.

Results

Results demonstrated a high mean bias in both the anteroposterior (AP) and mediolateral (ML) directions for COMe displacement. COMe velocity showed low mean bias but high limits of agreement and low precision. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient showed good to excellent agreement in the AP direction for velocity and displacement, respectively; poor agreement was seen in the ML direction.

Significance

Based on these observations, the COMe proposed by the Protokinetics software does not produce accurate results and is to be used with caution in healthy subjects; it is not recommended for subjects presenting pathological gait.

查看原文本刊更多论文

Protokinetics 运动分析软件对步行过程中质心位移和速度估算的并行有效性。

背景：实验室外步态分析的可能性越来越大，Protokinetics运动分析软件（PKMAS）最近开发出了一种新方法，除其他参数外，还可估算质量中心（COMe）位移。这种测量方法在临床和运动表现环境中都很有用：研究问题：PKMAS 是否能准确估计 COM 位移和速度？15 名参与者在 Zeno™ Walkway 上完成了 10 次行走试验，同时配备了用于 VICON 分析的全身标记集。使用布兰-阿尔特曼分析法和林氏一致系数将 PKMAS 得出的前后和内外侧 COMe 位移分量与标记跟踪得出的投影三维 COM 进行比较。此外，还根据 PKMAS 估算的位移数据计算了 COM 速度：结果表明，COMe 位移在前胸（AP）和内外侧（ML）方向的平均偏差都很大。COMe速度的平均偏差较低，但一致性和精确度的限制较高。林氏一致性相关系数（Lin's concordance correlation coefficient）显示，在 AP 方向上，速度和位移的一致性分别为良好到极佳；在 ML 方向上，一致性较差：根据上述观察结果，Protokinetics 软件提出的 COMe 不能得出准确的结果，健康受试者应慎用；对于出现病态步态的受试者，不建议使用。

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

Gait & posture 医学-神经科学

CiteScore

4.70

自引率

12.50%

发文量

616

审稿时长

6 months

期刊介绍： Gait & Posture is a vehicle for the publication of up-to-date basic and clinical research on all aspects of locomotion and balance. The topics covered include: Techniques for the measurement of gait and posture, and the standardization of results presentation; Studies of normal and pathological gait; Treatment of gait and postural abnormalities; Biomechanical and theoretical approaches to gait and posture; Mathematical models of joint and muscle mechanics; Neurological and musculoskeletal function in gait and posture; The evolution of upright posture and bipedal locomotion; Adaptations of carrying loads, walking on uneven surfaces, climbing stairs etc; spinal biomechanics only if they are directly related to gait and/or posture and are of general interest to our readers; The effect of aging and development on gait and posture; Psychological and cultural aspects of gait; Patient education.