A comparison between manual and automated event detection for a drop vertical jump task using motion capture

IF 1.4 3区 医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Clinical Biomechanics Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106220
Alex M. Loewen , Hannah L. Olander , Carlos Carlos Jr , Sophia Ulman
{"title":"A comparison between manual and automated event detection for a drop vertical jump task using motion capture","authors":"Alex M. Loewen ,&nbsp;Hannah L. Olander ,&nbsp;Carlos Carlos Jr ,&nbsp;Sophia Ulman","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The use of movement screens as a clinical tool for injury risk assessment requires variables to be extracted across specific phases of interest. While manually selecting task events is the traditional method, automated event detection is an effective technique that maintains consistency across a cohort. This study aimed to examine variations in event identification, comparing manual detection and the application of an automated algorithm, with a specific focus on a drop vertical jump task.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Thirty participants cleared to return-to-play after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and thirty controls were tested. For the automated event detection, normalized vertical ground reaction force and the velocity of the sacrum marker were used to identify five events during the drop vertical jump: initial contact, end of loading, end of propulsion, second contact, and end of second loading. Two raters manually selected events and were compared to the event times of the automated algorithm.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Manual event detection exhibited excellent reliability Significant differences between manual and automated detection were observed, particularly at events indicating the lowest squat position (Event2 and Event5). Participants who had undergone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction demonstrated larger differences than controls at Event5, correlating with significant squat depth disparities.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>While manual event detection demonstrated reliability, automated algorithms revealed differences, specifically in events of the drop vertical jump involving the lowest squat position. The automated algorithm presents potential benefits in reducing processing time and enhancing accuracy for event identification, offering valuable insights for motion capture applications in clinical settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50992,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biomechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268003324000524","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The use of movement screens as a clinical tool for injury risk assessment requires variables to be extracted across specific phases of interest. While manually selecting task events is the traditional method, automated event detection is an effective technique that maintains consistency across a cohort. This study aimed to examine variations in event identification, comparing manual detection and the application of an automated algorithm, with a specific focus on a drop vertical jump task.

Methods

Thirty participants cleared to return-to-play after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and thirty controls were tested. For the automated event detection, normalized vertical ground reaction force and the velocity of the sacrum marker were used to identify five events during the drop vertical jump: initial contact, end of loading, end of propulsion, second contact, and end of second loading. Two raters manually selected events and were compared to the event times of the automated algorithm.

Findings

Manual event detection exhibited excellent reliability Significant differences between manual and automated detection were observed, particularly at events indicating the lowest squat position (Event2 and Event5). Participants who had undergone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction demonstrated larger differences than controls at Event5, correlating with significant squat depth disparities.

Interpretation

While manual event detection demonstrated reliability, automated algorithms revealed differences, specifically in events of the drop vertical jump involving the lowest squat position. The automated algorithm presents potential benefits in reducing processing time and enhancing accuracy for event identification, offering valuable insights for motion capture applications in clinical settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用动作捕捉对垂直下落跳任务的手动和自动事件检测进行比较
使用运动筛查作为损伤风险评估的临床工具,需要在特定的关注阶段提取变量。手动选择任务事件是传统的方法,而自动事件检测则是一种有效的技术,可以保持整个队列的一致性。本研究旨在通过比较人工检测和自动算法的应用,对事件识别的变化进行研究,特别关注落体纵跳任务。对 30 名前交叉韧带重建后获准重返赛场的参赛者和 30 名对照组进行了测试。在自动事件检测中,使用归一化垂直地面反作用力和骶骨标记的速度来识别落体纵跳过程中的五个事件:初始接触、加载结束、推进结束、第二次接触和第二次加载结束。两名评分员手动选择事件,并与自动算法的事件时间进行比较。手动事件检测表现出极佳的可靠性 手动检测和自动检测之间存在显著差异,尤其是在表示最低下蹲位置的事件(事件 2 和事件 5)上。接受过前十字韧带重建术的参与者在事件 5 处的差异比对照组更大,这与显著的下蹲深度差异有关。虽然手动事件检测显示出了可靠性,但自动算法显示出了差异,特别是在涉及最低下蹲位置的下蹲纵跳事件中。自动算法在减少处理时间和提高事件识别准确性方面具有潜在优势,为临床环境中的运动捕捉应用提供了宝贵的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Biomechanics
Clinical Biomechanics 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
189
审稿时长
12.3 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Biomechanics is an international multidisciplinary journal of biomechanics with a focus on medical and clinical applications of new knowledge in the field. The science of biomechanics helps explain the causes of cell, tissue, organ and body system disorders, and supports clinicians in the diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment methods and technologies. Clinical Biomechanics aims to strengthen the links between laboratory and clinic by publishing cutting-edge biomechanics research which helps to explain the causes of injury and disease, and which provides evidence contributing to improved clinical management. A rigorous peer review system is employed and every attempt is made to process and publish top-quality papers promptly. Clinical Biomechanics explores all facets of body system, organ, tissue and cell biomechanics, with an emphasis on medical and clinical applications of the basic science aspects. The role of basic science is therefore recognized in a medical or clinical context. The readership of the journal closely reflects its multi-disciplinary contents, being a balance of scientists, engineers and clinicians. The contents are in the form of research papers, brief reports, review papers and correspondence, whilst special interest issues and supplements are published from time to time. Disciplines covered include biomechanics and mechanobiology at all scales, bioengineering and use of tissue engineering and biomaterials for clinical applications, biophysics, as well as biomechanical aspects of medical robotics, ergonomics, physical and occupational therapeutics and rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
Mid-vastus approach induces milder short-term effects on postural control compared to parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty. Between-limb difference in peak knee flexion angle can identify persons post-stroke with Stiff-Knee gait Fall assessment in healthy older adults: Approach using rambling-trembling decomposition method Biomechanical analysis of the effect of postero-latero-central tibial plateau fractures in the knee joint: Can posterior soft tissues prevent instability? A finite element study. Biomechanical modelling of indirect decompression in oblique lumbar intervertebral fusions – A finite element study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1