...
首页> 外文期刊>Gait & posture >Validity and repeatability of three in-shoe pressure measurement systems
【24h】

Validity and repeatability of three in-shoe pressure measurement systems

机译:三种鞋内压力测量系统的有效性和可重复性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In-shoe pressure measurement devices are used in research and clinic to quantify plantar foot pressures. Various devices are available, differing in size, sensor number and type; therefore accuracy and repeatability. Three devices (Medilogic, Tekscan and Pedar) were examined in a 2 day x 3 trial design, quantifying insole response to regional and whole insole loading. The whole insole protocol applied an even pressure (50-600 kPa) to the insole surface for 0-30 s in the Novel TruBlue (TM) device. The regional protocol utilised cylinders with contact surfaces of 3.14 and 15.9 cm(2) to apply pressures of 50 and 200 kPa. The validity (% difference and Root Mean Square Error: RMSE) and repeatability (Intra-Class Correlation Coefficient: ICC) of the applied pressures (whole insole) and contact area (regional) were outcome variables. Validity of the Pedar system was highest (RMSE 2.6 kPa; difference 3.9%), with the Medilogic (RMSE 27.0 kPa; difference 13.4%) and Tekscan (RMSE 27.0 kPa; difference 5.9%) systems displaying reduced validity. The average and peak pressures demonstrated high between-day repeatability for all three systems and each insole size (ICC >= 0.859). The regional contact area % difference ranged from -97 to +249%, but the ICC demonstrated medium to high between-day repeatability (ICC >= 0.797). Due to the varying responses of the systems, the choice of an appropriate pressure measurement device must be based on the loading characteristics and the outcome variables sought. Medilogic and Tekscan were most effective between 200 and 300 kPa; Pedar performed well across all pressures. Contact area was less precise, but relatively repeatable for all systems. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:鞋内压力测量设备在研究和临床中用于量化足底压力。可以使用各种设备,这些设备的大小,传感器数量和类型都不同。因此准确性和可重复性。在为期2天x 3的试验设计中检查了三种设备(Medilogic,Tekscan和Pedar),以量化鞋垫对区域和整个鞋垫负载的反应。整个鞋垫方案在Novel TruBlue(TM)设备中对鞋垫表面施加了均匀的压力(50-600 kPa),持续了0-30 s。区域协议使用了接触面为3.14和15.9 cm(2)的气瓶来施加50和200 kPa的压力。结果的变量是施加压力(整个鞋垫)和接触面积(区域)的有效性(%差异和均方根误差:RMSE)和重复性(类内相关系数:ICC)。 Pedar系统的有效性最高(RMSE 2.6 kPa;差异3.9%),而Medilogic(RMSE 27.0 kPa;差异13.4%)和Tekscan(RMSE 27.0 kPa;差异5.9%)系统的有效性降低。平均压力和峰值压力对所有三个系统和每个鞋垫尺寸均显示出较高的日间重复性(ICC> = 0.859)。区域接触面积%差异在-97%至+ 249%之间,但ICC显示出日间重复性中等至高(ICC> = 0.797)。由于系统的响应变化,必须根据负载特性和所需的结果变量选择合适的压力测量设备。 Medilogic和Tekscan在200至300 kPa时最有效; Pedar在所有压力下均表现出色。接触面积较不精确,但对于所有系统而言都是相对可重复的。 (C)2016 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

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