Display options
Cite
Hansen J, Pedersen AR, Sørensen H, et al. Analysis of 15 different pelvis marker protocols during sit-to-stand. J Biomech. 2021;130:110875doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110875.
Hansen, J., Pedersen, A. R., Sørensen, H., & Nielsen, J. F. (2021). Analysis of 15 different pelvis marker protocols during sit-to-stand. Journal of biomechanics, 130110875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110875
Hansen, Jakob, et al. "Analysis of 15 different pelvis marker protocols during sit-to-stand." Journal of biomechanics vol. 130 (2021): 110875. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110875
Hansen J, Pedersen AR, Sørensen H, Nielsen JF. Analysis of 15 different pelvis marker protocols during sit-to-stand. J Biomech. 2021 Nov 24;130:110875. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110875. Epub 2021 Nov 24. PMID: 34871893.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Biomech. 2021 Nov 24;130:110875. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110875. Epub 2021 Nov 24.

Analysis of 15 different pelvis marker protocols during sit-to-stand.

Journal of biomechanics

Jakob Hansen, Asger R Pedersen, Henrik Sørensen, Jørgen F Nielsen

Affiliations

  1. Hammel Neurorehabilitation Centre and University Research Clinic, Hammel, Denmark. Electronic address: [email protected].
  2. Hammel Neurorehabilitation Centre and University Research Clinic, Hammel, Denmark.
  3. Department of Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.

PMID: 34871893 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110875

Abstract

Sit-to-stand (STS) is a common transition movement needed to perform daily tasks. Previously, the kinematics of the STS movement has been investigated using optical motion capture. This method uses cameras and reflective markers on the body to capture movements. During STS, these markers can be difficult to measure due to blocked vision from the chair's arm- and backrest. This can result in poor data quality. The aim of this study was to investigate 15 different marker protocols and compare them in terms of visibility and selected outcome measures: hip flexion mean angle and range of motion (ROM). Fourteen healthy subjects completed five successful trials of STS. Marker protocols consisted of three anterior marker protocols and five posterior marker protocols, combined into a total of 15 marker protocols. For visibility, the traditional pelvis marker protocol proved unsuitable for STS tracking. Marker pins or additional markers anteriorly, and sacrum markers posteriorly, proved to be more suitable alternatives. For hip flexion mean angle and ROM, the estimates had similar tendencies. Hence, marker protocols were not outcome measure specific. Anteriorly, marker pins resulted in similar estimates as the traditional pelvis marker protocol. Posteriorly, sacrum markers estimated a smaller hip flexion angle, compared to the traditional pelvis marker protocol. In conclusion, marker pins can be used instead of regular ASIS markers at anterior pelvis. Posteriorly, sacrum markers can be used instead of PSIS markers.

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Kinematics; Marker protocols; Motion capture; Pelvis; Sit-to-stand

Publication Types