Kinematic models of the upper limb joints for multibody kinematics optimisation: An overview

Duprey, Sonia; Naaïm, Alexandre; Moissenet, Florent; Begon, Mickaël; Chèze, Laurence

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.12.005

Cited by 70 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This section summarizes both constraints in the constrained optimization and state variables in the Kalman filters. Other literature reviews, although not systematic nor systematized reviews, have been published on this particular topic where additional upper limb joint models have been listed [2,92,93]. In addition, a historical perspective for the introduction of the different lower limb joint models as well as their anatomical significance have been presented [3].…”

Section: Joint Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multibody Kinematics Optimization for the Estimation of Upper and Lower Limb Human Joint Kinematics: A Systematized Methodological Review

Begon

Andersen

Dumas

2018

Journal of Biomechanical Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multibody kinematics optimization (MKO) aims to reduce soft tissue artefact (STA) and is a key step in musculoskeletal modeling. The objective of this review was to identify the numerical methods, their validation and performance for the estimation of the human joint kinematics using MKO. Seventy-four papers were extracted from a systematized search in five databases and cross-referencing. Model-derived kinematics were obtained using either constrained optimization or Kalman filtering to minimize the difference between measured (i.e., by skin markers, electromagnetic or inertial sensors) and model-derived positions and/or orientations. While hinge, universal, and spherical joints prevail, advanced models (e.g., parallel and four-bar mechanisms, elastic joint) have been introduced, mainly for the knee and shoulder joints. Models and methods were evaluated using: (i) simulated data based, however, on oversimplified STA and joint models; (ii) reconstruction residual errors, ranging from 4 mm to 40 mm; (iii) sensitivity analyses which highlighted the effect (up to 36 deg and 12 mm) of model geometrical parameters, joint models, and computational methods; (iv) comparison with other approaches (i.e., single body kinematics optimization and nonoptimized kinematics); (v) repeatability studies that showed low intra- and inter-observer variability; and (vi) validation against ground-truth bone kinematics (with errors between 1 deg and 22 deg for tibiofemoral rotations and between 3 deg and 10 deg for glenohumeral rotations). Moreover, MKO was applied to various movements (e.g., walking, running, arm elevation). Additional validations, especially for the upper limb, should be undertaken and we recommend a more systematic approach for the evaluation of MKO. In addition, further model development, scaling, and personalization methods are required to better estimate the secondary degrees-of-freedom (DoF).

show abstract

Section: Joint Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multibody Kinematics Optimization for the Estimation of Upper and Lower Limb Human Joint Kinematics: A Systematized Methodological Review

Begon

Andersen

Dumas

2018

Journal of Biomechanical Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the kinematic chain is also defined by the segment length. Particularly, the clavicle length was demonstrated as crucial for the efficiency of upper limbs MKO (Duprey et al 2016). However, to date, personalisation procedures remain a great challenge.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This technique seemed to be efficient for tracking the scapula orientation but failed for the translation in segmental optimisation, resulting in acromio-clavicular dislocation (Naaim et al 2017). To avoid this phenomenon, some authors recommend the use of multibody kinematic optimisation (MKO) (Duprey et al 2016), giving a key role to the kinematic chain model. Different models have been proposed for the shoulder complex joints, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracking the scapula motion through multibody kinematics optimisation to study manual wheelchair propulsion

Puchaud

Hybois

Siegel

et al. 2017

Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…3 a, 3 b and 3 c). In addition to various standardised marker models for the lower extremities, including conventional gait model and calibrated anatomical system technique [18], there are also marker models for recording the upper extremities [19], as well as special marker models for more precise movement analysis of the foot segments, such as Oxford foot model [20,21]. Each marker model divides the body into a certain number of rigid body segments which are connected by joints with defined degrees of freedom.…”

Section: Mbsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Kinematic models of the upper limb joints for multibody kinematics optimisation: An overview

Cited by 70 publications

References 72 publications

Multibody Kinematics Optimization for the Estimation of Upper and Lower Limb Human Joint Kinematics: A Systematized Methodological Review

Multibody Kinematics Optimization for the Estimation of Upper and Lower Limb Human Joint Kinematics: A Systematized Methodological Review

Tracking the scapula motion through multibody kinematics optimisation to study manual wheelchair propulsion

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About