...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders >Validation of inertial measurement units with optical tracking system in patients operated with Total hip arthroplasty
【24h】

Validation of inertial measurement units with optical tracking system in patients operated with Total hip arthroplasty

机译:用总髋关节置换术患者用光学跟踪系统验证惯性测量单元

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Patient reported outcome measurement (PROMs) will not capture in detail the functional joint motion before and after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Therefore, methods more specifically aimed to analyse joint movements may be of interest. An analysis method that addresses these issues should be readily accessible and easy to use especially if applied to large groups of patients, who you want to study both before and after a surgical intervention such as THA. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of inertial measurement units (IMU) by comparison with an optical tracking system (OTS) to record pelvic tilt, hip and knee flexion in patients who had undergone THA. 49 subjects, 25 males 24 females, mean age of 73?years (range 51-80) with THA participated. All patients were measured with a portable IMU system, with sensors attached lateral to the pelvis, the thigh and the lower leg. For validation, a 12-camera motion capture system was used to determine the positions of 15 skin markers (Oqus 4, Qualisys AB, Sweden). Comparison of sagittal pelvic rotations, and hip and knee flexion-extension motions measured with the two systems was performed. The mean values of the IMU's on the left and right sides were compared with OTS data. The comparison between the two gait analysis methods showed no significant difference for mean pelvic tilt range (4.9-5.4 degrees) or mean knee flexion range (54.4-55.1 degrees) on either side (p??0.7). The IMU system did however record slightly less hip flexion on both sides (36.7-37.7 degrees for the OTS compared to 34.0-34.4 degrees for the IMU, p??0.001). We found that inertial measurement units can produce valid kinematic data of pelvis- and knee flexion-extension range. Slightly less hip flexion was however recorded with the inertial measurement units which may be due to the difference in the modelling of the pelvis, soft tissue artefacts, and malalignment between the two methods or misplacement of the inertial measurement units. The study has ethical approval from the ethical committee "Regionala etikpr?vningsn?mnden i G?teborg" (Dnr: 611-15, 2015-08-27) and all study participants have submitted written approval for participation in the study.
机译:患者报告的结果测量(PROMS)不会详细捕获总髋关节置换术(THA)之前和之后的功能性关节运动。因此,更具体地旨在分析关节运动的方法可能是有意义的。应对这些问题解决这些问题的分析方法应易于访​​问,易于使用,特别是如果适用于大型患者,您希望在此前和之后学习的手术干预,例如THA。我们的目的是通过与光学跟踪系统(OTS)进行比较来评估惯性测量单元(IMU),以记录患者的骨盆倾斜,髋关节和膝关节弯曲。 49名科目,24名女性,平均年龄为73岁?年(范围51-80)参加。所有患者均用便携式IMU系统测量,传感器连接到骨盆,大腿和小腿上。为了验证,使用12相机运动捕获系统来确定15个皮肤标记的位置(OQUS 4,Qualisys Ab,瑞典)。进行了与两个系统测量的矢状盆腔旋转的比较和髋关节和膝关节屈曲 - 延伸运动。将左侧和右侧的IMU的平均值与OTS数据进行比较。两种步态分析方法之间的比较显示,两侧的平均骨盆倾斜范围(4.9-5.4度)或平均膝关节屈曲范围(P?>β0.7)没有显着差异。然而,IMU系统在两侧的髋部屈曲略微略低(OTS的36.7-37.7度,与IMU的34.0-34.4度相比,p?<0.001)。我们发现惯性测量单元可以产生骨盆和膝关节屈曲范围的有效运动数据。然而,由于惯性测量单元,略微较少的髋部屈曲,这可能是由于骨盆,软组织伪造的建模和惯性测量单元的两种方法或错位之间的差异而导致的惯性测量单元。该研究从道德委员会“区域A Etikpr?vningsn?Mnden I G?Teborg”(DNR:611-15,2015-08-27)和所有研究参与者提交了参与这项研究的书面批准。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号