Alex M Loewen, Jan Karel Petric, Hannah L Olander, Joshua Riesenberg, Sophia Ulman
{"title":"A comparison between manual and automated event detection for shuffle, deceleration and run cut tasks using motion capture.","authors":"Alex M Loewen, Jan Karel Petric, Hannah L Olander, Joshua Riesenberg, Sophia Ulman","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Increased adolescent sports participation lead to a rise in sports-related injuries. These injuries impact athletes' health and performance, necessitating improved injury prevention methods. The shuffle, deceleration, and run cut tasks are commonly used in injury prevention protocols to elicit improper movement mechanics. Recent literature examined the use of an automated event detection algorithm to improve the accuracy of 3-dimensional motion capture data processing techniques. Manual and automated event detection methods were compared during these tasks in two different groups of participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty healthy controls and thirty adolescents following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, performed a shuffle, deceleration, and run-cut task in a motion capture lab. Specific timepoints of the tasks were manually identified by two raters and automatically detected by custom MATLAB algorithms. Intra- and inter-rater reliability, differences in event timings, and task performance were compared.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Significant differences in event timings were found between manual and automated methods, particularly with events identifying the lateral, forward, or vertical position of the participant with the absolute difference ranging from 4.7 to 13.5 frames across all three tasks. The identification of the first and last timepoints the foot is contacting the ground were similar between methods.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>The results of this study indicate that automated event detection is a more reliable method of identifying timepoints assessing participant's movement, highlighting its value in clinical and research settings. Automated event detection may improve injury risk assessments by minimizing user variability and offering consistent event identification across diverse movement tasks.</p>","PeriodicalId":50992,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biomechanics","volume":"129 ","pages":"106644"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106644","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Increased adolescent sports participation lead to a rise in sports-related injuries. These injuries impact athletes' health and performance, necessitating improved injury prevention methods. The shuffle, deceleration, and run cut tasks are commonly used in injury prevention protocols to elicit improper movement mechanics. Recent literature examined the use of an automated event detection algorithm to improve the accuracy of 3-dimensional motion capture data processing techniques. Manual and automated event detection methods were compared during these tasks in two different groups of participants.
Methods: Thirty healthy controls and thirty adolescents following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, performed a shuffle, deceleration, and run-cut task in a motion capture lab. Specific timepoints of the tasks were manually identified by two raters and automatically detected by custom MATLAB algorithms. Intra- and inter-rater reliability, differences in event timings, and task performance were compared.
Findings: Significant differences in event timings were found between manual and automated methods, particularly with events identifying the lateral, forward, or vertical position of the participant with the absolute difference ranging from 4.7 to 13.5 frames across all three tasks. The identification of the first and last timepoints the foot is contacting the ground were similar between methods.
Interpretation: The results of this study indicate that automated event detection is a more reliable method of identifying timepoints assessing participant's movement, highlighting its value in clinical and research settings. Automated event detection may improve injury risk assessments by minimizing user variability and offering consistent event identification across diverse movement tasks.
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.