Historical review and experience with the use of surface topographic systems in children with idiopathic scoliosis

Xc, Liu; Thometz, J.; Tassone, J. Channing; Paulsen, LC; Lyon, R

doi:10.13172/2052-9287-1-1-606

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The earlier Moiré topography provided relatively many false-negative results in the evaluation of progressive spinal deformities [59]. However, latest studies of recent systems have shown a significantly improved overall precision of the measured values for 3D spinal deformities [29]. The measured values, such as Q-angle, are sufficiently valid and reliable for everyday clinical use [29].…”

Section: Alternatives To Marker Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5). VRS thus offer a 3D measurement of the shape and deformation of the spine [29]. Different scoliosis measurands or indices (scoliosis angle, Q-angle, surface Cobb and lateral asymmetry) are displayed system-specifically without uniform norm ranges to describe the frontal spinal deformity.…”

Section: Vrsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over the past 30 years, VRS measurement systems have been developed by various manufacturers, which have individual advantages and disadvantages [29]. Validity studies could statically determine a very good correlation between the structure of the body surface (prominences or retractions) and underlying anatomical structures, e.g.…”

Section: Vrsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, latest studies of recent systems have shown a significantly improved overall precision of the measured values for 3D spinal deformities [29]. The measured values, such as Q-angle, are sufficiently valid and reliable for everyday clinical use [29]. However, there are no studies on the comparability of the different VRS measurement systems with each other.…”

Section: Alternatives To Marker Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, the development of rib humps as a result of vertebral body rotation can be detected earlier and better by VRS than radiologically [71] and is usually the decisive treatment criterion for patients compared to lateral bending of the spine. Recent systems display system-specific measured values for rotational deviations [29,72].…”

Section: Alternatives To Marker Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Movement Analysis in Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery – Measurement Systems and Clinical Applications

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Technical development lead to an enhancement of clinical movement analysis in the last few decades and expanded its research and clinical applications. Since the mid 20th century, human movement analysis has made its way into clinical practice, e.g. in treating poliomyelitis and infantile cerebral palsy. Today, it has a wide range of applications in various clinical areas. The aim of this narrative review is to illustrate the variety of camera-based systems for human movement analysis and their clinical applications, specifically in the field of orthopaedics and trauma surgery (O/U). Benefits and limitations of each system are shown. Future development and necessary improvements are discussed. Material and Methods A selective literature review was undertaken with the databases PubMed and Google Scholar using keywords related to clinical human movement analysis in the field of orthopaedics and trauma surgery. Furthermore standard book references were included. Results Common video camera systems (VS) are used for basic visual movement analysis. Instrumented movement analysis systems include marker-based systems (MBS), markerless optical systems (MLS) and rasterstereographic analysis systems (VRS). VS, MBS and MLS have clinical use for dynamic examination of patients with various disorders in movement and gait. Among such are e.g. neuro-orthopaedic disorders, muscular insufficiencies, degenerative and post-trauma deficiencies with e.g. resultant pathologic leg axis. Besides the measurement of kinematic data by MBS and MLS, the combination with kinetic measurements to detect abnormal loading patterns as well as the combination with electromyography (EMG) to detect abnormal muscle function is a great advantage. Validity and reliability of kinematic measurements depend on the camera systems (MBS, MLS), the applied marker models, the joints of interest and the observed movement plane. Movements in the sagittal plane of the hip and knee joint, pelvic rotation and tilt as well as hip abduction are generally measured with high reliability. In the frontal and transverse planes of the knee and ankle joint substantial angular variabilities were noted due to the small range of motion of the joints in these planes. Soft tissue artefacts and marker placement are the biggest sources of errors. So far MLS did not improve these limitations. MBS are most accurate and remain the gold-standard in clinical and scientific movement analysis. VRS is used clinically for static 3D-analysis of the trunk posture and spine deformities. Current systems allow the dynamic measurement and visualisation of trunk and spine movement in 3D during gait and running. Planar x-ray-imaging (Cobbʼs angle) and to some extent cross sectional imaging with CT-scan or MRI are commonly used for the evaluation of patients with spinal deformities. VRS offers functional 3D data of trunk and spine deformities without radiation exposure, thus allowing safer clinical monitoring of the mainly infantile and adolescent patients. The accuracy, validity and reliability of measurements of different VRS-systems for the clinical use has been proven by several studies. Conclusion The instrumented movement analysis is an additional tool that aids clinical practitioners of O/U in the dynamic assessment of pathologic movement and loading patterns. In conjunction with common radiologic imaging it aids in the planning of type and extent of corrective surgical interventions. In the field of orthopaedics and trauma surgery movement analysis can help as an additional diagnostic tool to develop therapeutic strategies and evaluate clinical outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Alternatives To Marker Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Vrsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Vrsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Alternatives To Marker Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Alternatives To Marker Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations