Cargando…

Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System

Over the last few years, the Leap Motion Controller™ (LMC) has been increasingly used in clinical environments to track hand, wrist and forearm positions as an alternative to the gold-standard motion capture systems. Since the LMC is marker-less, portable, easy-to-use and low-cost, it is rapidly bei...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ganguly, Amartya, Rashidi, Gabriel, Mombaur, Katja
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7959474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33802495
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21051750
_version_ 1783664970262642688
author Ganguly, Amartya
Rashidi, Gabriel
Mombaur, Katja
author_facet Ganguly, Amartya
Rashidi, Gabriel
Mombaur, Katja
author_sort Ganguly, Amartya
collection PubMed
description Over the last few years, the Leap Motion Controller™ (LMC) has been increasingly used in clinical environments to track hand, wrist and forearm positions as an alternative to the gold-standard motion capture systems. Since the LMC is marker-less, portable, easy-to-use and low-cost, it is rapidly being adopted in healthcare services. This paper demonstrates the comparison of finger kinematic data between the LMC and a gold-standard marker-based motion capture system, Qualisys Track Manager (QTM). Both systems were time synchronised, and the participants performed abduction/adduction of the thumb and flexion/extension movements of all fingers. The LMC and QTM were compared in both static measuring finger segment lengths and dynamic flexion movements of all fingers. A Bland–Altman plot was used to demonstrate the performance of the LMC versus QTM with Pearson’s correlation (r) to demonstrate trends in the data. Only the proximal interphalangeal joint (PIP) joint of the middle and ring finger during flexion/extension demonstrated acceptable agreement (r = 0.9062; r = 0.8978), but with a high mean bias. In conclusion, the study shows that currently, the LMC is not suitable to replace gold-standard motion capture systems in clinical settings. Further studies should be conducted to validate the performance of the LMC as it is updated and upgraded.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7959474
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79594742021-03-16 Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System Ganguly, Amartya Rashidi, Gabriel Mombaur, Katja Sensors (Basel) Article Over the last few years, the Leap Motion Controller™ (LMC) has been increasingly used in clinical environments to track hand, wrist and forearm positions as an alternative to the gold-standard motion capture systems. Since the LMC is marker-less, portable, easy-to-use and low-cost, it is rapidly being adopted in healthcare services. This paper demonstrates the comparison of finger kinematic data between the LMC and a gold-standard marker-based motion capture system, Qualisys Track Manager (QTM). Both systems were time synchronised, and the participants performed abduction/adduction of the thumb and flexion/extension movements of all fingers. The LMC and QTM were compared in both static measuring finger segment lengths and dynamic flexion movements of all fingers. A Bland–Altman plot was used to demonstrate the performance of the LMC versus QTM with Pearson’s correlation (r) to demonstrate trends in the data. Only the proximal interphalangeal joint (PIP) joint of the middle and ring finger during flexion/extension demonstrated acceptable agreement (r = 0.9062; r = 0.8978), but with a high mean bias. In conclusion, the study shows that currently, the LMC is not suitable to replace gold-standard motion capture systems in clinical settings. Further studies should be conducted to validate the performance of the LMC as it is updated and upgraded. MDPI 2021-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7959474/ /pubmed/33802495 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21051750 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ganguly, Amartya
Rashidi, Gabriel
Mombaur, Katja
Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System
title Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System
title_full Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System
title_fullStr Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System
title_short Comparison of the Performance of the Leap Motion Controller(TM) with a Standard Marker-Based Motion Capture System
title_sort comparison of the performance of the leap motion controller(tm) with a standard marker-based motion capture system
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7959474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33802495
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21051750
work_keys_str_mv AT gangulyamartya comparisonoftheperformanceoftheleapmotioncontrollertmwithastandardmarkerbasedmotioncapturesystem
AT rashidigabriel comparisonoftheperformanceoftheleapmotioncontrollertmwithastandardmarkerbasedmotioncapturesystem
AT mombaurkatja comparisonoftheperformanceoftheleapmotioncontrollertmwithastandardmarkerbasedmotioncapturesystem