皮肤和簇标记低估了控制运动时的膝关节屈曲。应用放射立体分析对12例膝关节置换术患者进行评价

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS Journal of biomechanics Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-17 DOI:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112591
Anna Fändriks, Roland Zügner, Bita Shareghi, Johan Kärrholm, Roy Tranberg
{"title":"皮肤和簇标记低估了控制运动时的膝关节屈曲。应用放射立体分析对12例膝关节置换术患者进行评价","authors":"Anna Fändriks,&nbsp;Roland Zügner,&nbsp;Bita Shareghi,&nbsp;Johan Kärrholm,&nbsp;Roy Tranberg","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Diverse marker sets and validation techniques have previously been utilized, posing challenges in comparing studies when assessing soft tissue artefacts in knee joint kinematics from motion analysis. This study aimed to analyse the data obtained from three different marker sets with the results derived from radiostereometric analysis (RSA) in measuring angular movements of the knee joint. Twelve post-knee replacement participants performed a one-leg step-down movement. Knee joint angular movements were analysed in flexion–extension, adduction-abduction, and internal-external rotation across all marker sets. The results were subsequently compared with those obtained from the RSA system using simple linear regression, a linear mixed-effects model, mean values and mean differences. All marker sets were found to systematically underestimate flexion–extension compared to RSA, with differences intensifying at higher knee flexion angles. The mean differences in the sagittal plane between RSA and the IOR marker set, progressively increased from approximately 5° (95% CI 4.3–4.9) to 15° (95% CI 11.6–17.9), reaching a maximum difference of 20° (95% CI 13.8–25.7) at 40° of knee flexion. Transverse and frontal plane data from all marker sets exhibited erratic errors compared to RSA. In summary, knee flexion–extension motions were consistent between marker sets, indicating minimal impact on results based on the marker set choice. However, all marker sets systematically underestimated skeletal motions in knee flexion–extension compared to RSA measurements. Data from the transverse and frontal planes were too inconsistent and therefore not reliable for use.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"182 ","pages":"Article 112591"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Skin and cluster markers underestimate knee flexion during controlled motions. Evaluation of 12 patients with knee arthroplasty using radiosterometric analysis as reference\",\"authors\":\"Anna Fändriks,&nbsp;Roland Zügner,&nbsp;Bita Shareghi,&nbsp;Johan Kärrholm,&nbsp;Roy Tranberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Diverse marker sets and validation techniques have previously been utilized, posing challenges in comparing studies when assessing soft tissue artefacts in knee joint kinematics from motion analysis. This study aimed to analyse the data obtained from three different marker sets with the results derived from radiostereometric analysis (RSA) in measuring angular movements of the knee joint. Twelve post-knee replacement participants performed a one-leg step-down movement. Knee joint angular movements were analysed in flexion–extension, adduction-abduction, and internal-external rotation across all marker sets. The results were subsequently compared with those obtained from the RSA system using simple linear regression, a linear mixed-effects model, mean values and mean differences. All marker sets were found to systematically underestimate flexion–extension compared to RSA, with differences intensifying at higher knee flexion angles. The mean differences in the sagittal plane between RSA and the IOR marker set, progressively increased from approximately 5° (95% CI 4.3–4.9) to 15° (95% CI 11.6–17.9), reaching a maximum difference of 20° (95% CI 13.8–25.7) at 40° of knee flexion. Transverse and frontal plane data from all marker sets exhibited erratic errors compared to RSA. In summary, knee flexion–extension motions were consistent between marker sets, indicating minimal impact on results based on the marker set choice. However, all marker sets systematically underestimated skeletal motions in knee flexion–extension compared to RSA measurements. Data from the transverse and frontal planes were too inconsistent and therefore not reliable for use.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"volume\":\"182 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112591\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025001022\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025001022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

不同的标记集和验证技术以前已经被使用,在比较研究中提出了挑战,当从运动分析中评估膝关节运动学中的软组织伪影时。本研究旨在分析从三种不同的标记集获得的数据,其结果来自于测量膝关节角运动的放射立体分析(RSA)。12名膝关节置换术后的参与者进行了单腿降压运动。在所有标记组中分析膝关节屈伸、内收外展和内外旋转的角度运动。随后,使用简单线性回归、线性混合效应模型、平均值和均值差,将结果与RSA系统获得的结果进行比较。与RSA相比,所有的标记组都系统性地低估了屈伸,在较高的膝关节屈伸角度时差异加剧。RSA和IOR标记组之间矢状面平均差异逐渐从约5°(95% CI 4.3-4.9)增加到15°(95% CI 11.6-17.9),在膝关节屈曲40°时达到最大差异20°(95% CI 13.8-25.7)。与RSA相比,所有标记集的横向和正面数据都表现出不稳定的误差。总之,膝关节屈伸运动在不同标记组之间是一致的,表明基于标记组选择对结果的影响最小。然而,与RSA测量相比,所有标记集系统地低估了膝关节屈伸的骨骼运动。横切面和额平面的数据太不一致,因此不可靠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Skin and cluster markers underestimate knee flexion during controlled motions. Evaluation of 12 patients with knee arthroplasty using radiosterometric analysis as reference
Diverse marker sets and validation techniques have previously been utilized, posing challenges in comparing studies when assessing soft tissue artefacts in knee joint kinematics from motion analysis. This study aimed to analyse the data obtained from three different marker sets with the results derived from radiostereometric analysis (RSA) in measuring angular movements of the knee joint. Twelve post-knee replacement participants performed a one-leg step-down movement. Knee joint angular movements were analysed in flexion–extension, adduction-abduction, and internal-external rotation across all marker sets. The results were subsequently compared with those obtained from the RSA system using simple linear regression, a linear mixed-effects model, mean values and mean differences. All marker sets were found to systematically underestimate flexion–extension compared to RSA, with differences intensifying at higher knee flexion angles. The mean differences in the sagittal plane between RSA and the IOR marker set, progressively increased from approximately 5° (95% CI 4.3–4.9) to 15° (95% CI 11.6–17.9), reaching a maximum difference of 20° (95% CI 13.8–25.7) at 40° of knee flexion. Transverse and frontal plane data from all marker sets exhibited erratic errors compared to RSA. In summary, knee flexion–extension motions were consistent between marker sets, indicating minimal impact on results based on the marker set choice. However, all marker sets systematically underestimated skeletal motions in knee flexion–extension compared to RSA measurements. Data from the transverse and frontal planes were too inconsistent and therefore not reliable for use.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of biomechanics
Journal of biomechanics 生物-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership. Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to: -Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells. -Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions. -Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response. -Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing. -Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine. -Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction. -Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules. -Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints. -Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics. -Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.
期刊最新文献
Design of epicardial restraints for optimized passive filling of the right ventricle Concurrent validity of Theia3D markerless compared to marker-based motion capture for movement synergy analysis during the 1-minute sit-to-stand test Datasets for acquiring 3D bone shapes: a systematic review Analysis of head movements during gait in healthy populations and people with neurological disorders: a systematic review Hamstrings muscle dynamics during the Nordic hamstring exercise and high-speed running
×
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:604180095
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