Cargando…

Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial

Artificial intelligence technology is becoming more prevalent in health care as a tool to improve practice patterns and patient outcomes. This study assessed ability of a commercialized artificial intelligence (AI) mobile application to identify and improve bodyweight squat form in adult participant...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luna, Alessandro, Casertano, Lorenzo, Timmerberg, Jean, O’Neil, Margaret, Machowsky, Jason, Leu, Cheng-Shiun, Lin, Jianghui, Fang, Zhiqian, Douglas, William, Agrawal, Sunil
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8437936/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34518568
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97343-y
_version_ 1783752261186355200
author Luna, Alessandro
Casertano, Lorenzo
Timmerberg, Jean
O’Neil, Margaret
Machowsky, Jason
Leu, Cheng-Shiun
Lin, Jianghui
Fang, Zhiqian
Douglas, William
Agrawal, Sunil
author_facet Luna, Alessandro
Casertano, Lorenzo
Timmerberg, Jean
O’Neil, Margaret
Machowsky, Jason
Leu, Cheng-Shiun
Lin, Jianghui
Fang, Zhiqian
Douglas, William
Agrawal, Sunil
author_sort Luna, Alessandro
collection PubMed
description Artificial intelligence technology is becoming more prevalent in health care as a tool to improve practice patterns and patient outcomes. This study assessed ability of a commercialized artificial intelligence (AI) mobile application to identify and improve bodyweight squat form in adult participants when compared to a physical therapist (PT). Participants randomized to AI group (n = 15) performed 3 squat sets: 10 unassisted control squats, 10 squats with performance feedback from AI, and 10 additional unassisted test squats. Participants randomized to PT group (n = 15) also performed 3 identical sets, but instead received performance feedback from PT. AI group intervention did not differ from PT group (log ratio of two odds ratios =  − 0.462, 95% confidence interval (CI) (− 1.394, 0.471), p = 0.332). AI ability to identify a correct squat generated sensitivity 0.840 (95% CI (0.753, 0.901)), specificity 0.276 (95% CI (0.191, 0.382)), PPV 0.549 (95% CI (0.423, 0.669)), NPV 0.623 (95% CI (0.436, 0.780)), and accuracy 0.565 95% CI (0.477, 0.649)). There was no statistically significant association between group allocation and improved squat performance. Current AI had satisfactory ability to identify correct squat form and limited ability to identify incorrect squat form, which reduced diagnostic capabilities. Trial Registration NCT04624594, 12/11/2020, retrospectively registered.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8437936
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84379362021-09-15 Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial Luna, Alessandro Casertano, Lorenzo Timmerberg, Jean O’Neil, Margaret Machowsky, Jason Leu, Cheng-Shiun Lin, Jianghui Fang, Zhiqian Douglas, William Agrawal, Sunil Sci Rep Article Artificial intelligence technology is becoming more prevalent in health care as a tool to improve practice patterns and patient outcomes. This study assessed ability of a commercialized artificial intelligence (AI) mobile application to identify and improve bodyweight squat form in adult participants when compared to a physical therapist (PT). Participants randomized to AI group (n = 15) performed 3 squat sets: 10 unassisted control squats, 10 squats with performance feedback from AI, and 10 additional unassisted test squats. Participants randomized to PT group (n = 15) also performed 3 identical sets, but instead received performance feedback from PT. AI group intervention did not differ from PT group (log ratio of two odds ratios =  − 0.462, 95% confidence interval (CI) (− 1.394, 0.471), p = 0.332). AI ability to identify a correct squat generated sensitivity 0.840 (95% CI (0.753, 0.901)), specificity 0.276 (95% CI (0.191, 0.382)), PPV 0.549 (95% CI (0.423, 0.669)), NPV 0.623 (95% CI (0.436, 0.780)), and accuracy 0.565 95% CI (0.477, 0.649)). There was no statistically significant association between group allocation and improved squat performance. Current AI had satisfactory ability to identify correct squat form and limited ability to identify incorrect squat form, which reduced diagnostic capabilities. Trial Registration NCT04624594, 12/11/2020, retrospectively registered. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8437936/ /pubmed/34518568 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97343-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This 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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Luna, Alessandro
Casertano, Lorenzo
Timmerberg, Jean
O’Neil, Margaret
Machowsky, Jason
Leu, Cheng-Shiun
Lin, Jianghui
Fang, Zhiqian
Douglas, William
Agrawal, Sunil
Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial
title Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial
title_full Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial
title_short Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial
title_sort artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8437936/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34518568
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97343-y
work_keys_str_mv AT lunaalessandro artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT casertanolorenzo artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT timmerbergjean artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT oneilmargaret artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT machowskyjason artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT leuchengshiun artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT linjianghui artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT fangzhiqian artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT douglaswilliam artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT agrawalsunil artificialintelligenceapplicationversusphysicaltherapistforsquatevaluationarandomizedcontrolledtrial