Cargando…
Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison
BACKGROUND: Emerging sensing and communication technologies are contributing to the development of many motor rehabilitation programs outside the standard healthcare facilities. Nowadays, motor rehabilitation exercises can be easily performed and monitored even at home by a variety of motion-trackin...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7178588/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32326957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00762-7 |
_version_ | 1783525489903665152 |
---|---|
author | Milosevic, Bojan Leardini, Alberto Farella, Elisabetta |
author_facet | Milosevic, Bojan Leardini, Alberto Farella, Elisabetta |
author_sort | Milosevic, Bojan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Emerging sensing and communication technologies are contributing to the development of many motor rehabilitation programs outside the standard healthcare facilities. Nowadays, motor rehabilitation exercises can be easily performed and monitored even at home by a variety of motion-tracking systems. These are cheap, reliable, easy-to-use, and allow also remote configuration and control of the rehabilitation programs. The two most promising technologies for home-based motor rehabilitation programs are inertial wearable sensors and video-based motion capture systems. METHODS: In this paper, after a thorough review of the relevant literature, an original experimental analysis is reported for two corresponding commercially available solutions, a wearable inertial measurement unit and the Kinect, respectively. For the former, a number of different algorithms for rigid body pose estimation from sensor data were also tested. Both systems were compared with the measurements obtained with state-of-the-art marker-based stereophotogrammetric motion analysis, taken as a gold-standard, and also evaluated outside the lab in a home environment. RESULTS: The results in the laboratory setting showed similarly good performance for the elementary large motion exercises, with both systems having errors in the 3–8 degree range. Usability and other possible limitations were also assessed during utilization at home, which revealed additional advantages and drawbacks for the two systems. CONCLUSIONS: The two evaluated systems use different technology and algorithms, but have similar performance in terms of human motion tracking. Therefore, both can be adopted for monitoring home-based rehabilitation programs, taking adequate precautions however for operation, user instructions and interpretation of the results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7178588 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71785882020-04-24 Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison Milosevic, Bojan Leardini, Alberto Farella, Elisabetta Biomed Eng Online Research BACKGROUND: Emerging sensing and communication technologies are contributing to the development of many motor rehabilitation programs outside the standard healthcare facilities. Nowadays, motor rehabilitation exercises can be easily performed and monitored even at home by a variety of motion-tracking systems. These are cheap, reliable, easy-to-use, and allow also remote configuration and control of the rehabilitation programs. The two most promising technologies for home-based motor rehabilitation programs are inertial wearable sensors and video-based motion capture systems. METHODS: In this paper, after a thorough review of the relevant literature, an original experimental analysis is reported for two corresponding commercially available solutions, a wearable inertial measurement unit and the Kinect, respectively. For the former, a number of different algorithms for rigid body pose estimation from sensor data were also tested. Both systems were compared with the measurements obtained with state-of-the-art marker-based stereophotogrammetric motion analysis, taken as a gold-standard, and also evaluated outside the lab in a home environment. RESULTS: The results in the laboratory setting showed similarly good performance for the elementary large motion exercises, with both systems having errors in the 3–8 degree range. Usability and other possible limitations were also assessed during utilization at home, which revealed additional advantages and drawbacks for the two systems. CONCLUSIONS: The two evaluated systems use different technology and algorithms, but have similar performance in terms of human motion tracking. Therefore, both can be adopted for monitoring home-based rehabilitation programs, taking adequate precautions however for operation, user instructions and interpretation of the results. BioMed Central 2020-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7178588/ /pubmed/32326957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00762-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Milosevic, Bojan Leardini, Alberto Farella, Elisabetta Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison |
title | Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison |
title_full | Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison |
title_fullStr | Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison |
title_full_unstemmed | Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison |
title_short | Kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison |
title_sort | kinect and wearable inertial sensors for motor rehabilitation programs at home: state of the art and an experimental comparison |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7178588/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32326957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00762-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT milosevicbojan kinectandwearableinertialsensorsformotorrehabilitationprogramsathomestateoftheartandanexperimentalcomparison AT leardinialberto kinectandwearableinertialsensorsformotorrehabilitationprogramsathomestateoftheartandanexperimentalcomparison AT farellaelisabetta kinectandwearableinertialsensorsformotorrehabilitationprogramsathomestateoftheartandanexperimentalcomparison |