Cargando…
Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users
Current literature lacks a comparative analysis of different motion capture systems for tracking upper limb (UL) movement as individuals perform standard tasks. To better understand the performance of various motion capture systems in quantifying UL movement in the prosthesis user population, this s...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9029489/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35458943 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22082953 |
_version_ | 1784691890863472640 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Sophie L. Civillico, Gene Niswander, Wesley Kontson, Kimberly L. |
author_facet | Wang, Sophie L. Civillico, Gene Niswander, Wesley Kontson, Kimberly L. |
author_sort | Wang, Sophie L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Current literature lacks a comparative analysis of different motion capture systems for tracking upper limb (UL) movement as individuals perform standard tasks. To better understand the performance of various motion capture systems in quantifying UL movement in the prosthesis user population, this study compares joint angles derived from three systems that vary in cost and motion capture mechanisms: a marker-based system (Vicon), an inertial measurement unit system (Xsens), and a markerless system (Kinect). Ten healthy participants (5F/5M; 29.6 ± 7.1 years) were trained with a TouchBionic i-Limb Ultra myoelectric terminal device mounted on a bypass prosthetic device. Participants were simultaneously recorded with all systems as they performed standardized tasks. Root mean square error and bias values for degrees of freedom in the right elbow, shoulder, neck, and torso were calculated. The IMU system yielded more accurate kinematics for shoulder, neck, and torso angles while the markerless system performed better for the elbow angles. By evaluating the ability of each system to capture kinematic changes of simulated upper limb prosthesis users during a variety of standardized tasks, this study provides insight into the advantages and limitations of using different motion capture technologies for upper limb functional assessment. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9029489 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90294892022-04-23 Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users Wang, Sophie L. Civillico, Gene Niswander, Wesley Kontson, Kimberly L. Sensors (Basel) Article Current literature lacks a comparative analysis of different motion capture systems for tracking upper limb (UL) movement as individuals perform standard tasks. To better understand the performance of various motion capture systems in quantifying UL movement in the prosthesis user population, this study compares joint angles derived from three systems that vary in cost and motion capture mechanisms: a marker-based system (Vicon), an inertial measurement unit system (Xsens), and a markerless system (Kinect). Ten healthy participants (5F/5M; 29.6 ± 7.1 years) were trained with a TouchBionic i-Limb Ultra myoelectric terminal device mounted on a bypass prosthetic device. Participants were simultaneously recorded with all systems as they performed standardized tasks. Root mean square error and bias values for degrees of freedom in the right elbow, shoulder, neck, and torso were calculated. The IMU system yielded more accurate kinematics for shoulder, neck, and torso angles while the markerless system performed better for the elbow angles. By evaluating the ability of each system to capture kinematic changes of simulated upper limb prosthesis users during a variety of standardized tasks, this study provides insight into the advantages and limitations of using different motion capture technologies for upper limb functional assessment. MDPI 2022-04-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9029489/ /pubmed/35458943 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22082953 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Wang, Sophie L. Civillico, Gene Niswander, Wesley Kontson, Kimberly L. Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users |
title | Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users |
title_full | Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users |
title_short | Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users |
title_sort | comparison of motion analysis systems in tracking upper body movement of myoelectric bypass prosthesis users |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9029489/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35458943 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22082953 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangsophiel comparisonofmotionanalysissystemsintrackingupperbodymovementofmyoelectricbypassprosthesisusers AT civillicogene comparisonofmotionanalysissystemsintrackingupperbodymovementofmyoelectricbypassprosthesisusers AT niswanderwesley comparisonofmotionanalysissystemsintrackingupperbodymovementofmyoelectricbypassprosthesisusers AT kontsonkimberlyl comparisonofmotionanalysissystemsintrackingupperbodymovementofmyoelectricbypassprosthesisusers |