-
Something wrong with this record ?
Differences in evaluation methods of trunk sway using different MoCap systems
P. Kutilek, V. Socha, O. Cakrt, Z. Svoboda,
Language English Country Poland
Document type Evaluation Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
NLK
Free Medical Journals
from 1999
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
from 2007-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
from 1999
PubMed
25087580
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Biomechanical Phenomena MeSH
- Physiology methods MeSH
- Evaluation Studies as Topic MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Eye MeSH
- Posture physiology MeSH
- Torso physiology MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Evaluation Study MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
The position of the trunk can be negatively influenced by many diseases. Several methods can be used for identifying defects in balance and coordination as a result of pathology of the musculoskeletal or nervous system. The aim of this article is to examine the relationship between the three methods used for analysis of trunk sway and compare two fundamentally different MoCap systems. We used a camera system and a 3DOF orientation tracker placed on subject's trunk, and measured inclination (roll) and flexion (pitch) during quiet stance. Ten healthy participants in the study were measured with eyes open and closed. The pitch versus roll plots of trunk were formed, and the area of the convex hull, area of confidence ellipse and total length of the trajectory of the pitch versus roll plot were calculated. The statistical analysis was performed and strong correlation between the area of the convex hull and area of the confidence ellipse was found. Also, the results show moderate correlation between the area of the confidence ellipse and total length of the trace, and moderate correlation between the area of the convex hull and total length of the trace. In general, the different MoCap systems show different areas and lengths but lead to the same conclusions. Statistical analysis of the participants with eyes open and eye closed did not show significant difference in the areas and total lengths of the pitch versus roll plots.
Faculty of Biomedical Engineering Czech Technical University Prague Prague the Czech Republic
Palacky University of Olomouc Faculty of Physical Culture the Czech Republic
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc15014110
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20150423104836.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 150420s2014 pl f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)25087580
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a pl
- 100 1_
- $a Kutilek, Patrik $u Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, the Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Differences in evaluation methods of trunk sway using different MoCap systems / $c P. Kutilek, V. Socha, O. Cakrt, Z. Svoboda,
- 520 9_
- $a The position of the trunk can be negatively influenced by many diseases. Several methods can be used for identifying defects in balance and coordination as a result of pathology of the musculoskeletal or nervous system. The aim of this article is to examine the relationship between the three methods used for analysis of trunk sway and compare two fundamentally different MoCap systems. We used a camera system and a 3DOF orientation tracker placed on subject's trunk, and measured inclination (roll) and flexion (pitch) during quiet stance. Ten healthy participants in the study were measured with eyes open and closed. The pitch versus roll plots of trunk were formed, and the area of the convex hull, area of confidence ellipse and total length of the trajectory of the pitch versus roll plot were calculated. The statistical analysis was performed and strong correlation between the area of the convex hull and area of the confidence ellipse was found. Also, the results show moderate correlation between the area of the confidence ellipse and total length of the trace, and moderate correlation between the area of the convex hull and total length of the trace. In general, the different MoCap systems show different areas and lengths but lead to the same conclusions. Statistical analysis of the participants with eyes open and eye closed did not show significant difference in the areas and total lengths of the pitch versus roll plots.
- 650 _2
- $a biomechanika $7 D001696
- 650 _2
- $a hodnotící studie jako téma $7 D005069
- 650 _2
- $a oči $7 D005123
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a fyziologie $x metody $7 D010827
- 650 _2
- $a postura těla $x fyziologie $7 D011187
- 650 _2
- $a trup $x fyziologie $7 D060726
- 650 _2
- $a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
- 655 _2
- $a hodnotící studie $7 D023362
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Socha, Vladimir $u Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, the Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Cakrt, Ondrej $u Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, the Czech Republic University Hospital Motol - 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Prague, the Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Svoboda, Zdenek $u Palacky University of Olomouc, Faculty of Physical Culture, the Czech Republic.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00172317 $t Acta of bioengineering and biomechanics Wrocław University of Technology $x 1509-409X $g Roč. 16, č. 2 (2014), s. 85-94
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25087580 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20150420 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20150423105136 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1071691 $s 896988
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2014 $b 16 $c 2 $d 85-94 $i 1509-409X $m Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics $n Acta Bioeng Biomech $x MED00172317
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20150420