IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/gcmbxx/v22y2019i2p149-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Routine clinical motion analysis: comparison of a bespoke real-time protocol to current clinical methods

Author

Listed:
  • Lindsay Jane Millar
  • Lin Meng
  • Philip John Rowe

Abstract

Motion analysis (MA) hardware has recently become more accessible; however, protocols have not developed in conjunction. Routine clinical assessment mostly relies on unreliable observational methods. This study aimed to develop an MA protocol for routine clinical use and compare kinematics and reliability to the gold-standard. Ten participants completed 10 over ground walks with a comprehensive marker set (bespoke and gold-standard). Inter/intra-assessor reliability was also compared. Results demonstrated comparable kinematics. Reliability of the bespoke model was lower than the gold standard but higher than observational methods. The bespoke model can be recommended for routine clinical use to assess patient progress and function.

Suggested Citation

  • Lindsay Jane Millar & Lin Meng & Philip John Rowe, 2019. "Routine clinical motion analysis: comparison of a bespoke real-time protocol to current clinical methods," Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 149-158, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:22:y:2019:i:2:p:149-158
    DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2018.1541089
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10255842.2018.1541089
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10255842.2018.1541089?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:22:y:2019:i:2:p:149-158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/gcmb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.