Cargando…
Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study
BACKGROUND: Our study aims to validate a commercially available inertial measurement unit (IMU) system against a standard laboratory-based optical motion capture (OMC) system for shoulder measurements in a clinical context. METHODS: The validation analyses were conducted on 19 healthy male volunteer...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9634209/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36338310 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/mhealth-22-7 |
_version_ | 1784824421296373760 |
---|---|
author | Chan, Li Yi Tammy Chua, Chong Shan Chou, Siaw Meng Seah, Ren Yi Benjamin Huang, Yilun Luo, Yue Dacy, Lincoln Bin Abd Razak, Hamid Rahmatullah |
author_facet | Chan, Li Yi Tammy Chua, Chong Shan Chou, Siaw Meng Seah, Ren Yi Benjamin Huang, Yilun Luo, Yue Dacy, Lincoln Bin Abd Razak, Hamid Rahmatullah |
author_sort | Chan, Li Yi Tammy |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Our study aims to validate a commercially available inertial measurement unit (IMU) system against a standard laboratory-based optical motion capture (OMC) system for shoulder measurements in a clinical context. METHODS: The validation analyses were conducted on 19 healthy male volunteers. Twelve reflective markers were placed on each participant’s trunk, scapula and across the arm and one IMU was attached via a self-adhesive strap on the forearm. A single tester simultaneously collected shoulder kinematic data for four shoulder movements: flexion, extension, external rotation, and abduction. Agreement between OMC system and IMU measurements was assessed with Bland-Altman analyses. Secondary analysis included mean biases, root mean square error (RMSE) analysis and Welch’s t-test. RESULTS: Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA) exceeded the acceptable range of mean difference for 95% of the population (−22.27°, 11.31°). The mean bias showed high levels of agreement within 8° for all four movements. More than 60% of participants demonstrated mean bias less than 10° between methods. Statistically significant differences were found between measurements for abduction (P<0.001) and flexion (P=0.027) but not for extension and external rotation (P≥0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows preliminary evidence for acceptable accuracy of a commercially available IMU against an OMC system for assessment of shoulder movements by a single tester. The IMU also exhibits similar whole degree of error compared to a standard goniometer with potential for application in remote rehabilitation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9634209 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96342092022-11-05 Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study Chan, Li Yi Tammy Chua, Chong Shan Chou, Siaw Meng Seah, Ren Yi Benjamin Huang, Yilun Luo, Yue Dacy, Lincoln Bin Abd Razak, Hamid Rahmatullah Mhealth Original Article BACKGROUND: Our study aims to validate a commercially available inertial measurement unit (IMU) system against a standard laboratory-based optical motion capture (OMC) system for shoulder measurements in a clinical context. METHODS: The validation analyses were conducted on 19 healthy male volunteers. Twelve reflective markers were placed on each participant’s trunk, scapula and across the arm and one IMU was attached via a self-adhesive strap on the forearm. A single tester simultaneously collected shoulder kinematic data for four shoulder movements: flexion, extension, external rotation, and abduction. Agreement between OMC system and IMU measurements was assessed with Bland-Altman analyses. Secondary analysis included mean biases, root mean square error (RMSE) analysis and Welch’s t-test. RESULTS: Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA) exceeded the acceptable range of mean difference for 95% of the population (−22.27°, 11.31°). The mean bias showed high levels of agreement within 8° for all four movements. More than 60% of participants demonstrated mean bias less than 10° between methods. Statistically significant differences were found between measurements for abduction (P<0.001) and flexion (P=0.027) but not for extension and external rotation (P≥0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows preliminary evidence for acceptable accuracy of a commercially available IMU against an OMC system for assessment of shoulder movements by a single tester. The IMU also exhibits similar whole degree of error compared to a standard goniometer with potential for application in remote rehabilitation. AME Publishing Company 2022-10-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9634209/ /pubmed/36338310 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/mhealth-22-7 Text en 2022 mHealth. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Chan, Li Yi Tammy Chua, Chong Shan Chou, Siaw Meng Seah, Ren Yi Benjamin Huang, Yilun Luo, Yue Dacy, Lincoln Bin Abd Razak, Hamid Rahmatullah Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study |
title | Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study |
title_full | Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study |
title_fullStr | Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study |
title_short | Assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study |
title_sort | assessment of shoulder range of motion using a commercially available wearable sensor—a validation study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9634209/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36338310 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/mhealth-22-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chanliyitammy assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy AT chuachongshan assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy AT chousiawmeng assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy AT seahrenyibenjamin assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy AT huangyilun assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy AT luoyue assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy AT dacylincoln assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy AT binabdrazakhamidrahmatullah assessmentofshoulderrangeofmotionusingacommerciallyavailablewearablesensoravalidationstudy |