Eleonora Croci , Christoph Künzel , Dominic Gehring , Andreas Marc Müller , Annegret Mündermann
{"title":"在全手臂运动范围内,Theia三维无标记运动捕捉和基于标记的运动捕捉之间的肩部运动学比较","authors":"Eleonora Croci , Christoph Künzel , Dominic Gehring , Andreas Marc Müller , Annegret Mündermann","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While markerless motion capture system has recently gained interest, little is known on the accuracy of Theia 3D for measuring shoulder kinematics. This study aimed to compare shoulder kinematics across the full range of arm motion between Theia 3D and a gold standard marker-based motion capture system. Shoulder kinematics of 20 healthy subjects were measured during three repetitions of bilateral full arm scaption, abduction, flexion, internal rotation, external rotation, and internal and external rotation at 90° abduction. Data were simultaneously collected with Theia 3D (v2024.1.24) markerless and marker-based motion capture. Markerless and marker-based angular trajectories had similar patterns, with larger differences towards the inflection point of the movements and with the markerless trajectories having mostly greater values than marker-based trajectories. Root mean square differences were smallest for abduction angles (<6°) and largest for the external rotation angles (15.3°–22.3°). Coefficients of multiple correlations (CMCs) were mostly good to excellent (>0.75), but CMC was moderate (0.65–0.75) for flexion angles during rotation at 90° and weak (<0.65) for flexion angles during external rotation. For almost all tasks, the ranges of motion differed significantly between the two measurement systems in all three planes. However, mean differences in the coronal plane and in the sagittal plane were within the minimal clinically important differences. We found moderate to very strong correlations between the range of motion parameters of the two measurement methods. The assessment of shoulder kinematics with Theia 3D is promising but further improvements are needed for clinical routine application.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"191 ","pages":"Article 112905"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of shoulder kinematics between Theia 3D markerless motion capture and marker-based motion capture during full arm ranges of motion\",\"authors\":\"Eleonora Croci , Christoph Künzel , Dominic Gehring , Andreas Marc Müller , Annegret Mündermann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>While markerless motion capture system has recently gained interest, little is known on the accuracy of Theia 3D for measuring shoulder kinematics. This study aimed to compare shoulder kinematics across the full range of arm motion between Theia 3D and a gold standard marker-based motion capture system. Shoulder kinematics of 20 healthy subjects were measured during three repetitions of bilateral full arm scaption, abduction, flexion, internal rotation, external rotation, and internal and external rotation at 90° abduction. Data were simultaneously collected with Theia 3D (v2024.1.24) markerless and marker-based motion capture. Markerless and marker-based angular trajectories had similar patterns, with larger differences towards the inflection point of the movements and with the markerless trajectories having mostly greater values than marker-based trajectories. Root mean square differences were smallest for abduction angles (<6°) and largest for the external rotation angles (15.3°–22.3°). Coefficients of multiple correlations (CMCs) were mostly good to excellent (>0.75), but CMC was moderate (0.65–0.75) for flexion angles during rotation at 90° and weak (<0.65) for flexion angles during external rotation. For almost all tasks, the ranges of motion differed significantly between the two measurement systems in all three planes. However, mean differences in the coronal plane and in the sagittal plane were within the minimal clinically important differences. We found moderate to very strong correlations between the range of motion parameters of the two measurement methods. The assessment of shoulder kinematics with Theia 3D is promising but further improvements are needed for clinical routine application.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"volume\":\"191 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112905\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025004178\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025004178","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
虽然无标记运动捕捉系统最近引起了人们的兴趣,但人们对Theia 3D测量肩部运动学的准确性知之甚少。本研究旨在比较Theia 3D和黄金标准的基于标记的运动捕捉系统在整个手臂运动范围内的肩部运动学。我们测量了20名健康受试者在双侧全臂摘除术、外展、屈曲、内旋、外旋和90°外展时的肩部运动学。使用Theia 3D (v2024.1.24)无标记和基于标记的动作捕捉同时收集数据。无标记和基于标记的角轨迹具有相似的模式,但在运动拐点上存在较大差异,并且无标记轨迹的值大多大于基于标记的轨迹。外展角的均方根差异最小(<6°),外旋角的均方根差异最大(15.3°-22.3°)。多重相关系数(CMC)大多为良好至优秀(>0.75),但CMC在90°旋转时的屈曲角为中等(0.65 - 0.75),在外旋转时的屈曲角为弱(<0.65)。在几乎所有的任务中,两种测量系统在所有三个平面上的运动范围都有显著差异。然而,冠状面和矢状面的平均差异在最小的临床重要差异范围内。我们发现两种测量方法的运动参数范围之间存在中度到非常强的相关性。Theia 3D肩关节运动学评估很有前景,但临床常规应用需要进一步改进。
Comparison of shoulder kinematics between Theia 3D markerless motion capture and marker-based motion capture during full arm ranges of motion
While markerless motion capture system has recently gained interest, little is known on the accuracy of Theia 3D for measuring shoulder kinematics. This study aimed to compare shoulder kinematics across the full range of arm motion between Theia 3D and a gold standard marker-based motion capture system. Shoulder kinematics of 20 healthy subjects were measured during three repetitions of bilateral full arm scaption, abduction, flexion, internal rotation, external rotation, and internal and external rotation at 90° abduction. Data were simultaneously collected with Theia 3D (v2024.1.24) markerless and marker-based motion capture. Markerless and marker-based angular trajectories had similar patterns, with larger differences towards the inflection point of the movements and with the markerless trajectories having mostly greater values than marker-based trajectories. Root mean square differences were smallest for abduction angles (<6°) and largest for the external rotation angles (15.3°–22.3°). Coefficients of multiple correlations (CMCs) were mostly good to excellent (>0.75), but CMC was moderate (0.65–0.75) for flexion angles during rotation at 90° and weak (<0.65) for flexion angles during external rotation. For almost all tasks, the ranges of motion differed significantly between the two measurement systems in all three planes. However, mean differences in the coronal plane and in the sagittal plane were within the minimal clinically important differences. We found moderate to very strong correlations between the range of motion parameters of the two measurement methods. The assessment of shoulder kinematics with Theia 3D is promising but further improvements are needed for clinical routine application.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.