Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor-a validation study.

IF 2.2 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
mHealth Pub Date : 2022-10-30 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.21037/mhealth-22-7
Li Yi Tammy Chan, Chong Shan Chua, Siaw Meng Chou, Ren Yi Benjamin Seah, Yilun Huang, Yue Luo, Lincoln Dacy, Hamid Rahmatullah Bin Abd Razak
{"title":"Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor-a validation study.","authors":"Li Yi Tammy Chan,&nbsp;Chong Shan Chua,&nbsp;Siaw Meng Chou,&nbsp;Ren Yi Benjamin Seah,&nbsp;Yilun Huang,&nbsp;Yue Luo,&nbsp;Lincoln Dacy,&nbsp;Hamid Rahmatullah Bin Abd Razak","doi":"10.21037/mhealth-22-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Our study aims to validate a commercially available inertial measurement unit (IMU) system against a standard laboratory-based optical motion capture (OMC) system for shoulder measurements in a clinical context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The validation analyses were conducted on 19 healthy male volunteers. Twelve reflective markers were placed on each participant's trunk, scapula and across the arm and one IMU was attached via a self-adhesive strap on the forearm. A single tester simultaneously collected shoulder kinematic data for four shoulder movements: flexion, extension, external rotation, and abduction. Agreement between OMC system and IMU measurements was assessed with Bland-Altman analyses. Secondary analysis included mean biases, root mean square error (RMSE) analysis and Welch's <i>t</i>-test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA) exceeded the acceptable range of mean difference for 95% of the population (-22.27°, 11.31°). The mean bias showed high levels of agreement within 8° for all four movements. More than 60% of participants demonstrated mean bias less than 10° between methods. Statistically significant differences were found between measurements for abduction (P<0.001) and flexion (P=0.027) but not for extension and external rotation (P≥0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study shows preliminary evidence for acceptable accuracy of a commercially available IMU against an OMC system for assessment of shoulder movements by a single tester. The IMU also exhibits similar whole degree of error compared to a standard goniometer with potential for application in remote rehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":74181,"journal":{"name":"mHealth","volume":" ","pages":"30"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/55/4f/mh-08-22-7.PMC9634209.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"mHealth","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth-22-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Our study aims to validate a commercially available inertial measurement unit (IMU) system against a standard laboratory-based optical motion capture (OMC) system for shoulder measurements in a clinical context.

Methods: The validation analyses were conducted on 19 healthy male volunteers. Twelve reflective markers were placed on each participant's trunk, scapula and across the arm and one IMU was attached via a self-adhesive strap on the forearm. A single tester simultaneously collected shoulder kinematic data for four shoulder movements: flexion, extension, external rotation, and abduction. Agreement between OMC system and IMU measurements was assessed with Bland-Altman analyses. Secondary analysis included mean biases, root mean square error (RMSE) analysis and Welch's t-test.

Results: Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA) exceeded the acceptable range of mean difference for 95% of the population (-22.27°, 11.31°). The mean bias showed high levels of agreement within 8° for all four movements. More than 60% of participants demonstrated mean bias less than 10° between methods. Statistically significant differences were found between measurements for abduction (P<0.001) and flexion (P=0.027) but not for extension and external rotation (P≥0.05).

Conclusions: Our study shows preliminary evidence for acceptable accuracy of a commercially available IMU against an OMC system for assessment of shoulder movements by a single tester. The IMU also exhibits similar whole degree of error compared to a standard goniometer with potential for application in remote rehabilitation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

使用市售可穿戴传感器评估肩部活动范围-验证研究。
背景:我们的研究旨在验证商用惯性测量单元(IMU)系统与标准实验室光学运动捕捉(OMC)系统在临床环境中的肩部测量。方法:对19名健康男性志愿者进行验证分析。在每个参与者的躯干、肩胛骨和手臂上放置12个反射标记,并在前臂上通过自粘带连接一个IMU。单个测试器同时收集四种肩部运动的运动学数据:屈曲、伸展、外旋和外展。用Bland-Altman分析评估OMC系统和IMU测量结果之间的一致性。二次分析包括均值偏倚、均方根误差(RMSE)分析和Welch’st检验。结果:95%的人群(-22.27°,11.31°)的Bland-Altman同意限(LoA)超过平均差的可接受范围。平均偏差显示,所有四种运动在8°内的一致性很高。超过60%的参与者表现出方法间的平均偏差小于10°。结论:我们的研究显示了初步的证据,表明商用IMU与OMC系统相比,单个测试者评估肩部运动的准确性是可以接受的。与标准测角仪相比,IMU也显示出类似的整体误差程度,具有在远程康复中应用的潜力。
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
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信