Cargando…
Comparing a Sensor for Movement Assessment with Traditional Physiotherapeutic Assessment Methods in Patients after Knee Surgery—A Method Comparison and Reproducibility Study
Wearable sensors offer the opportunity for patients to perform a self-assessment of their function with respect to a variety of movement exercises. Corresponding commercial products have the potential to change the communication between patients and physiotherapists during the recovery process. Even...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9779175/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36554461 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416581 |
Sumario: | Wearable sensors offer the opportunity for patients to perform a self-assessment of their function with respect to a variety of movement exercises. Corresponding commercial products have the potential to change the communication between patients and physiotherapists during the recovery process. Even if they turn out to be user-friendly, there remains the question to what degree the numerical results are reliable and comparable with those obtained by assessment methods traditionally used. To address this question for one specific recently developed and commercially available sensor, a method comparison study was performed. The sensor-based assessment of eight movement parameters was compared with an assessment of the same parameters based on test procedures traditionally used. Thirty-three patients recovering after arthroscopic knee surgery participated in the study. The whole assessment procedure was repeated. Reproducibility and agreement were quantified by the intra class correlation coefficient. The height of a one-leg vertical jump and the number of side hops showed high agreement between the two modalities and high reproducibility (ICC > 0.85). Due to differences in the set-up of the assessment, agreement could not be achieved for three mobility parameters, but even the correlation was only fair (r < 0.5). Knee stability showed poor agreement. Consequently, the use of the sensor can currently only be recommended for selected parameters. The variation in degree of agreement and reproducibility across different parameters clearly indicate the need for developing corresponding guidance for each new sensor put onto the market. |
---|