Search

Background Inertial motion capture (IMC) is rapidly gaining in popularity to evaluate gait in clinical settings. Previous examinations of IMC knee kinematics were often limited to the sagittal plane and IMC calibration has not been thoroughly investigated. Research question The objective was to validate IMC 3D knee kinematics calibrated with a double-pose during gait with reference to optical motion capture (OMC). The hypotheses are that IMC can estimate adequately knee kinematics and that both systems will detect similarly the changes with gait speed. Methods Twenty-four healthy participants walked on the treadmill at gait speed of 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 and 1.2 m/s. Knee kinematics were obtained simultaneously with two magnetic and inertial measurement units and passive markers fixed on the KneeKG system. OMC was calibrated with a functional anatomical approach and the IMC with a double-pose. Results Root mean square differences of the two systems yielded 3-6° for knee flexion, adduction and external rotation. Knee kinematics were more similar during the stance phase than the swing phase. Gait speed showed a significant progressive effect on the three knee angles that was similarly detected by the two systems. Significance IMC 3D knee kinematics can be obtained independently with a simple calibration and only two magnetic and inertial measurement units at an acceptable level of error especially during stance.

Rigid attachment systems are one of the methods used to compensate for soft tissue artifact (STA) inherent in joint motion analyses.The goal of this study was to quantify STA of an exoskeleton design to reduce STA at the knee, and to assess the accuracy of 3D knee kinematics recorded with the exoskeleton in non-obese and obese subjects during quasi-static weight-bearing squatting activity using biplane radiography.Nine non-obese and eight obese subjects were recruited. The exoskeleton was calibrated on each subject before they performed a quasistatic squatting activity in the EOSThe results showed that STA observed at the femur was larger in non-obese subjects than in obese subjects in frontal rotation (p = 0.004), axial rotation (p = 0.000), medio-lateral displacement (p = 0.000) and antero-posterior displacement (p = 0.019), while STA observed at the tibia was lower in non-obese subjects than in obese subjects for the three rotations (p 0.05) and medio-lateral displacement (p = 0.015). Differences between the markers and bones knee kinematics increased with knee flexion and were similar in both groups, except for abduction-adduction: 4.9° for non-obese subjects against 2.3° for obese subjects (p = 0.011).This study demonstrated that STA at the femur and its impact on knee abduction-adduction using a specific exoskeleton were greater among non-obese subjects than obese subjects, which is encouraging for future biomechanical studies on pathologies such as osteoarthritis.