Evaluation of anatomical landmark calibration accuracy of a motion capture based analysis protocol

Rácz, Kristóf ✉ [Rácz, Kristóf (Biomechanika, bio...), author] Department of Mechatronics, Optics and Informat... (BUTE / FME); Palya, Zsofia [Pálya, Zsófia (Biomechanika, bio...), author] Department of Mechatronics, Optics and Informat... (BUTE / FME); Takács, Mária [Takács, Mária (Ortopédia, Biomec...), author]; Nagymáté, Gergely [Nagymáté, Gergely (Biomechatronika), author] Department of Mechatronics, Optics and Informat... (BUTE / FME); Kiss, Rita M. [Kiss, Rita (Biomechanika, Bio...), author] Department of Mechatronics, Optics and Informat... (BUTE / FME)

English Conference paper in journal (Journal Article) Scientific
Published: MATERIALS TODAY: PROCEEDINGS 2214-7853 5 (13, Part 2) pp. 26538-26543 2018
Conference: 34th Danubia Adria Symposium on Advances in Experimental Mechanics, DAS 2017 2017-09-19 [Trieste, Italy]
    Motion analysis is a quickly developing field, with many practical uses in research, clinical applications and sports. The main goal of the present study was to determine the accuracy of anatomical landmark placement in a new motion analysis method, that uses rigid-body tracking. The position and orientation of rigid bodies were measured by an OptiTrack (NaturalPoint, Corvallis, OR, USA) motion capture system. Eight subjects (age: 40.8±28.8 years, mass: 69.4±18.1 kg, height: 168.1±14.8 cm) were measured by two examiners. Intra-examiner errors were determined from the variation of the calibrated position of anatomical landmarks, while inter-examiner errors were determined as the difference of the mean calibrated position of anatomical landmarks between the examiners. An intra-examiner error of just 2-3 mm was achieved in cases, the calibration method is satisfyingly accurate. The results showed that, the error of examiner with medical background was higher compared to the examiner with experience in the measurement method. No connection was found between subject body mass index and calibration accuracy. However, it was found that inter-examiner errors are very large, thus making measurements incomparable between examiners. These findings should be considered during further development of the measurement protocol.
    Citation styles: IEEEACMAPAChicagoHarvardCSLCopyPrint
    2024-12-07 19:42