Accuracy of a three-dimensional lumbar motion monitor for recording dynamic trunk motion characteristics

Marras, William S.; Fathallah, Fadi A.; Miller, Rose; Davis, Steve; Mirka, Gary A.

doi:10.1016/0169-8141(92)90078-e

Cited by 247 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The LMM has been validated against video-based motion analysis and has been shown to be more accurate than video-based analysis when placed in multiple configurations on a 3D-calibration frame (0.96°accuracy in the sagittal, 1.71°in the frontal, and 0.50°in the transverse planes). 27 Also, the reproducibility of the LMM for in vivo ROM measurement in the 3 primary planes is suitably high (ICC = 0.82-0.96) for use in research and clinical settings. 15 The LMM was attached onto the subjects according to previous specifications.…”

Section: Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thoracolumbar Proprioception in Individuals with and without Low Back Pain: Intratester Reliability, Clinical Applicability, and Validity

Koumantakis¹,

Winstanley²,

Oldham³

2002

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design: Repeated measures design of active spinal position sense in individuals with and without low back pain (LBP). Objectives: Reproducibility and validity evaluation of thoracolumbar proprioception measurement. Background: Proprioception studies in peripheral joints and the spine suggest that there may be proprioception deficits due to injury, pain, or degeneration. Kinesthetic retraining may be useful in rehabilitation of patients with LBP, but appropriate measures are required to objectively quantify spinal proprioception. Methods and Measures: Active-target reproduction in the sagittal, horizontal, and coronal planes was assessed (3 separate occasions for 18 asymptomatic volunteers and 2 occasions for 62 patients with LBP). Repositioning accuracy was expressed as absolute errors (AE) and variable errors (VE). Reliability was analyzed with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and precision with standard error of measurement (SEM) and calculation of the smallest detectable difference (SDD) index. Repeated measures ANOVA and correlations were used for within-group comparisons and discriminant analysis for between-group comparisons. Results: Reproducibility was better for the asymptomatic group, with AE for flexion and rotation being the most reliable (ICC = 0.76-0.80, SEM = 0.91°-1.34°). SDDs were high for all tests, suggesting limited clinical applicability. Reproducibility for the same tests was poor-moderate (ICC = 0.31-0.64, SEM = 0.45°-3.90°) for the patient group. AE for right-side rotation could discriminate between subject groups with 83.3% specificity but only 54.8% sensitivity. Conclusions: Proprioception testing, with the methods employed, did not demonstrate good measurement properties in a sample of patients with recurrent LBP. Neither could it sufficiently discriminate between individuals with and without LBP. Possible reasons for these findings are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thoracolumbar Proprioception in Individuals with and without Low Back Pain: Intratester Reliability, Clinical Applicability, and Validity

Koumantakis¹,

Winstanley²,

Oldham³

2002

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Six bi-polar electrodes (Model DE-2.1, Bagnoli™ Delsys) were attached to the skin over the bilateral muscle groups: erector spinae, rectus abdominis, and external oblique and these data were collected at 1024 Hz. The Lumber Motion Monitor (LMM) (Chattanooga Group Inc., TN) was attached along the back of the participant to capture the trunk kinematic (Marras et al 1992). The LMM provided 60 Hz continuous measurement of angular position, velocity and acceleration in three cardinal planes of motion: sagittal, coronal and transverse plane.…”

Section: Data Collection Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of sinusoidal rolling ground motion on lifting biomechanics

Ning

Mirka

2010

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to quantify the effects of ground surface motion on the biomechanical responses of a person performing a lifting task. A boat motion simulator (BMS) was built to provide a sinusoidal ground motion (simultaneous vertical linear translation and a roll angular displacement) that simulates the deck motion on a small fishing boat. Sixteen participants performed lifting, lowering and static holding tasks under conditions of two levels of mass (5 and 10kg) and five ground moving conditions. Each ground moving condition was specified by its ground angular displacement and instantaneous vertical

show abstract

“…A model with the highest R2 and lowest SE is the best one statistically, but when the differences among models in R2 and SE are too small to be of practical concern, the best model is chosen from the standpoint of feasibility or usability. The effect of the weight handled was included in the model as a continuous variable instead of as a categorical variable, as indicated in equations (4) and (6). In this way the unit for the coefficient w was deg/kg, so the effect of the weight on the inclinometer reading was easy to interpret.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of Trunk Inclination by Means of an Inclinometer

Seo¹,

Kakehashi

Tsuru

et al. 1997

Journal of Occupational Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the experimental study, twelve male subjects held 1, 5, and 10 kg boxes at 0, 20, 40, and 60 cm from the floor in forward-bending and squatting postures. The inclinometers were fixed on the back at L4, Th 12, and Th5.The relation between trunk inclination and the inclinometer reading in measurement data showed concave, straight, and convex curves at L4, Th12, and Th5, respectively, as the theoretical model analysis had indicated. At L4 and Th5, however, the relation could be regarded as linear because the coefficients of determinations (R2) of the theoretical models calculated by the regression analyses agreed closely to those of the simple linear models.The difference between the forwardbending and squatting postures was large at L4, but small at Th12 and Th5.The effect of the weight handled was small and negligible in making these estimates. For ergonomic evaluation of working conditions, it is important to have a clear idea of working postures at actual work places'-4). Observational and goniometric methods are often used to record working postures3-6). Inclinometers are also used for simplified quantitative measurement-10), but the location of an inclinometer on the body is problematic, usually depending on the purpose of the observation-9).To evaluate low back load, the inclinometer is usually fixed on the upper body of the subject to record the trunk inclination (angle between vertical and a line between the acromion and greater trochanter) and a special calibration curve must be developed because the inclinometer does not measure the trunk inclination directly. If the trunk were a rigid component, the estimation would be simple and easy because trunk inclination and the inclinometer reading would show a linear relation, but actual trunk inclination involves trunk bending and pelvic rotation", 12). Most of the trunk bending occurs in the lower portion of the spinal column13, 14), and pelvic rotation is reduced according to the trunk inclination"). The actual relation between trunk inclination and the inclinometer reading should therefore be nonlinear. To what extent and under what conditions can the inclinometer calibration method be linear? This point has been insufficiently studied.In this paper we first try to clarify the relation between trunk inclination and the inclinometer reading by using a theoretical model. We then present experimental data on the effects of inclinometer location, working posture, and the weight handled on this relation. Theoretical StudyAccording to a statistical analysis by Anderson et aL, pelvic rotation can be estimated by the following equation 15):

show abstract

Accuracy of a three-dimensional lumbar motion monitor for recording dynamic trunk motion characteristics

Cited by 247 publications

References 8 publications

Thoracolumbar Proprioception in Individuals with and without Low Back Pain: Intratester Reliability, Clinical Applicability, and Validity

Thoracolumbar Proprioception in Individuals with and without Low Back Pain: Intratester Reliability, Clinical Applicability, and Validity

The effect of sinusoidal rolling ground motion on lifting biomechanics

Estimation of Trunk Inclination by Means of an Inclinometer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About