Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 313 items for :

  • "motion analysis" x
  • Athletic Training, Therapy, and Rehabilitation x
Clear All
Open access

Mohammad Reza Pourahmadi, Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani, Shapour Jaberzadeh, Javad Sarrafzadeh, Mohammad Ali Sanjari, Rasool Bagheri and Morteza Taghipour

. 18 Although electromagnetic tracking systems are a better alternative and would be a suitable technique for assessing functional activities (eg, gait, STS) in a clinical setting, the quantitative analysis of functional activities using optical motion analysis systems is well established, and has

Restricted access

Gaspare Pavei, Elena Seminati, Jorge L.L. Storniolo and Leonardo A. Peyré-Tartaruga

We compared running mechanics parameters determined from ground reaction force (GRF) measurements with estimated forces obtained from double differentiation of kinematic (K) data from motion analysis in a broad spectrum of running speeds (1.94–5.56 m⋅s–1). Data were collected through a force-instrumented treadmill and compared at different sampling frequencies (900 and 300 Hz for GRF, 300 and 100 Hz for K). Vertical force peak, shape, and impulse were similar between K methods and GRF. Contact time, flight time, and vertical stiffness (kvert) obtained from K showed the same trend as GRF with differences < 5%, whereas leg stiffness (kleg) was not correctly computed by kinematics. The results revealed that the main vertical GRF parameters can be computed by the double differentiation of the body center of mass properly calculated by motion analysis. The present model provides an alternative accessible method for determining temporal and kinetic parameters of running without an instrumented treadmill.

Restricted access

Young-Hoo Kwon

The purpose of this study was twofold: (a) to investigate the effects of selected experimental factors on the magnitude of the object plane deformation due to refraction, and (b) to discuss their practical implications in an effort to improve the applicability of the 2-D DLT method in the underwater motion analysis. The RMS and maximum object plane reconstruction errors of various experimental conditions were computed systematically. To isolate the error due to refraction from the experimental errors, the comparator coordinates (image plane coordinates) of the control points were computed based on a theoretical refraction model rather than actual digitizing. It was concluded from a series of object plane reconstruction that among the distance and angle factors of the experimental setting in the 2-D underwater motion analysis, the camera-to-interface distance and the interface-to-control-object distance are the two major factors affecting the magnitude of the object plane deformation. The other factors revealed only minor effects. The advantages of the 2-D DLT method over the traditional multiplier method in underwater motion analysis. such as oblique projection and multiple camera setup. were further discussed. Possible ways to reduce the maximum reconstruction error were also explored.

Restricted access

Barbara C. Belyea, Ethan Lewis, Zachary Gabor, Jill Jackson and Deborah L. King

Context: Lower-extremity landing mechanics have been implicated as a contributing factor in knee pain and injury, yet cost-effective and clinically accessible methods for evaluating movement mechanics are limited. The identification of valid, reliable, and readily accessible technology to assess lower-extremity alignment could be an important tool for clinicians, coaches, and strength and conditioning specialists. Objective: To examine the validity and reliability of using a handheld tablet and movement-analysis application (app) for assessing lower-extremity alignment during a drop vertical-jump task. Design: Concurrent validation. Setting: Laboratory. Participants: 22 healthy college-age subjects (11 women and 11 men, mean age 21 ± 1.4 y, mean height 1.73 ± 0.12 m, mean mass 71 ± 13 kg) with no lower-extremity pathology that prevented safe landing from a drop jump. Intervention: Subjects performed 6 drop vertical jumps that were recorded simultaneously using a 3-dimensional (3D) motion-capture system and a handheld tablet. Main Outcomes Measures: Angles on the tablet were calculated using a motion-analysis app and from the 3D motion-capture system using Visual 3D. Hip and knee angles were measured and compared between both systems. Results: Significant correlations between the tablet and 3D measures for select frontal- and sagittal-plane ranges of motion and angles at maximum knee flexion (MKF) ranged from r = .48 (P = .036) for frontal-plane knee angle at MKF to r = .77 (P < .001) for knee flexion at MKF. Conclusion: Results of this study suggest that a handheld tablet and app may be a reliable method for assessing select lower-extremity joint alignments during drop vertical jumps, but this technology should not be used to measure absolute joint angles. However, sports medicine specialists could use a handheld tablet to reliably record and evaluate lower-extremity movement patterns on the field or in the clinic.

Restricted access

Aki Salo and Paul N. Grimshaw

Eight trials each of 7 athletes (4 women and 3 men) were videotaped and digitized in order to investigate the variation sources and kinematic variability of video motion analysis in sprint hurdles. Mean coefficients of variation (CVs) of individuals ranged from 1.0 to 92.2% for women and from 1.2 to 209.7% for men. There were 15 and 14 variables, respectively, in which mean CVs revealed less than 5% variation. In redigitizing, CVs revealed <1.0% for 12 variables for the women's trials and 10 variables for the men's trials. These results, together with variance components (between-subjects, within-subject, and redigitizing), showed that one operator and the analysis system together produced repeatable values for most of the variables. The most repeatable variables by this combination were displacement variables. However, further data processing (e.g., differentiation) appeared to have some unwanted effects on repeatability. Regarding the athletes' skill, CVs showed that athletes can reproduce most parts of their performance within certain (reasonably low) limits.

Restricted access

Bryan Sorenson, Thomas W. Kernozek, John David Willson, Robert Ragan and Jordan Hove

Context:

Hip- and knee-joint kinematics during drop landings are relevant to lower-extremity injury mechanisms. In clinical research the “gold standard” for joint kinematic assessment is 3-dimensional (3D) motion analysis. However, 2-dimensional (2D) kinematic analysis is an objective and feasible alternative.

Objective:

To quantify the relationship between 2D and 3D hip and knee kinematics in single-leg drop landings and test for a set of 3D hip and knee kinematics that best predicts 2D kinematic measures during single-leg drop landings Design: Descriptive, comparative laboratory study.

Participants:

31 healthy college-age women (65.5 kg [SD 12.3], 168.1 cm [SD 6.7]).

Methods:

Participants performed five 40-cm single-leg landings during motion capture at 240 Hz. Multiple regressions were used to predict relationships for knee and hip between 2D frontal-plane projection angles (FPPA) and 3D measurements.

Results:

2D knee FPPA had a strong relationship with 3D frontal-plane knee kinematics at initial contact (IC) (r 2 = .72), which was only minimally improved with the addition of knee sagittal-plane and hip transverse-plane positions at IC (r 2 = .77). In contrast, 2D knee FPPA had a low relationship with 3D knee-abduction excursion (r 2 = .06). The addition of knee sagittal-plane and hip transverse-plane motions did not improve this relationship (r 2 = .14). 2D hip FPPA had a moderate relationship with 3D frontal-plane hip position at IC (r 2 = .52), which was strengthened with the addition of hip sagittal-plane position (r 2 = .60). In addition, hip 2D FPPA into adduction excursion had a strong association with 3D hip-adduction excursion (r 2 = .70).

Conclusion:

2D kinematics can predict 3D frontal-plane hip and knee position at IC during a single-leg landing but predict 3D frontal-plane knee excursion with far less accuracy.

Restricted access

Gustavo Ramos Dalla Bernardina, Tony Monnet, Heber Teixeira Pinto, Ricardo Machado Leite de Barros, Pietro Cerveri and Amanda Piaia Silvatti

Optoelectronic motion capture systems (MOCAP), such as Vicon (Oxford Metrics Ltd, Oxford, United Kingdom), Elite (BTS, Milan, Italy), Qualisys (Göteborg, Sweden), Motion Analysis (Motion Analysis Corp, Santa Rosa, CA), and OptiTrack (NaturalPoint, Inc, Corvallis, OR), are considered to be the

Restricted access

Dominique C. Leibbrandt and Quinette A. Louw

series was to investigate an individualized FMR approach on 8 subjects with AKP using subjects’ unaffected legs as a control to allow for individual variation in etiology and symptoms. Methods Setting The motion analysis was done at the 3D motion analysis at the Tygerberg CAF Motion Analysis Laboratory

Restricted access

Susana Meireles, Neil D. Reeves, Richard K. Jones, Colin R. Smith, Darryl G. Thelen and Ilse Jonkers

imaging; OA, osteoarthritis. Motion analysis was performed while barefoot ascending and descending a staircase consisting of seven 17.2-cm height steps (Figure  1 ). A 10-camera 3-dimensional motion capture system (Vicon Motion Systems Inc, Los Angeles, CA) synchronized with 4 force platforms (embedded in

Restricted access

Colin Higgs

Wheelchair racquetball players in the A and B divisions of the 1989 Canadian Racquetball Championships were videotaped and their performances were analyzed. The results indicated that the athletes had an exercise-to-pause ratio of 1:1.5 at the A level and 1:2.3 at the B level. Rallies were slightly longer at the higher level, with substantially longer pause periods at the B level. There was a higher percentage of longer rallies at the A level, although both divisions of play had comparable percentages of forehand and backhand shots. A-level players demonstrated greater distances covered per rally, greater wheelchair speed, and a higher degree of wheelchair maneuverability measured by the number and magnitude of directional changes. In particular, A-level players showed a greater tendency to use small directional corrections, particularly turns to the right of less than 45 °. It is suggested that this action allowed a less restricted backswing for powerful forehand shots.