Evaluating Lower Limb Joint Flexion by Computerized Visual Tracking System and Compared with Electrogoniometer and Universal Goniometer

The lower limb joint’s range of motion (ROM) is an important clinical parameter used in diagnosing the severity level of lower limb joint injury. Along with the use of mechanical devices such as goniometer or electrogoniometer, motion capture and visual tracking has been increasingly deployed to aid the lower limb joint diagnosis. The universal goniometer can simply measure the joint angles. However, it has some limitations on allowing the clinician to analyze the ROM at the gate and track the lower limb joint. Motion capture devices are mainly used to analyze the patient’s joint flexion and assess the condition of the joints and bones. This study has used the visual tracking system (VTS), electrogoniometer (EGM) and universal goniometer (UGM) methods to examine the range of motion of 20 healthy subject volunteers. The results of three methods have been compared and discussed. The ROM result shows that VTS have the smallest SEM with averaged of 1.49 compared to EGM 3.41 and UGM 1.53. Thus, VTS give the high accurate in averaged lower limb flexion measurement. The result of joint flexion shows that left and right limb joint are similar for the healthy subject.

[1]  S. Bronner,et al.  Reliability and validity of a new ankle electrogoniometer , 2010, Journal of medical engineering & technology.

[2]  Andrew Blake,et al.  Articulated body motion capture by annealed particle filtering , 2000, Proceedings IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2000 (Cat. No.PR00662).

[3]  B Zappa,et al.  A model of an electro-goniometer and its calibration for biomechanical applications. , 2000, Medical engineering & physics.

[4]  Henrik Aanæs,et al.  Markerless motion capture can provide reliable 3D gait kinematics in the sagittal and frontal plane. , 2014, Medical engineering & physics.

[5]  P. Jonsson,et al.  Comparison of measurement accuracy between two types of wrist goniometer systems. , 2001, Applied ergonomics.

[6]  William D. Bandy,et al.  Joint Range of Motion and Muscle Length Testing , 2009 .

[7]  Benjamin M. Auerbach,et al.  Limb bone bilateral asymmetry: variability and commonality among modern humans. , 2006, Journal of human evolution.

[8]  Johannes Martinsson,et al.  Implementation of motion capture support in smartphones , 2010 .

[9]  E. Kohler Development of Markerless Motion Capture Methods to Measure Risk Factors for ACL Injury in Female Athletes , 2012 .

[10]  C. Cobelli,et al.  A Markerless Motion Capture System to Study Musculoskeletal Biomechanics: Visual Hull and Simulated Annealing Approach , 2006, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[11]  K Ohlsson,et al.  Measurements of wrist and forearm positions and movements: effect of, and compensation for, goniometer crosstalk. , 2004, Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology.

[12]  M. Muhlenhaupt Measurement of Joint Motion: A Guide to Goniometry , 1986 .

[13]  Malin Söderqvist,et al.  Differences in torque, H/Q-ratio and left to right leg between adolescent floorball and soccer players , 2014 .

[14]  R. Ouckama Comparison of Flexible Electrogoniometers to a 3 D Optical Tracking System for Measurements of Ankle Angles During Level Walking and Running , 2008 .

[15]  C. Callan,et al.  ENCYCLOPEDIA AND DICTIONARY OF MEDICINE, NURSING AND ALLIED HEALTH , 1983, The Ulster Medical Journal.

[16]  B. Yates Merriman's assessment of the lower limb , 2009 .

[17]  Roger G. Eston,et al.  Kinanthropometry and exercise physiology laboratory manual , 2001 .