Reliability of Using a Handheld Tablet and Application to Measure Lower-Extremity Alignment Angles

King, Deborah L.; Belyea, Barbara

doi:10.1123/jsr.2014-0195

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings show that initial contact angles for both limbs can be reliably measured using 2D video analysis, with ICCs ranging from 0.87-0.93 and CV% between 1.0-1.6% across all drop heights (Table 1-3). Previously, SEM values for establishing sagittal-plane knee and hip angles at initial contact using 2D analysis during drop jumps have shown to range between 1.4-4.1˚ and 1.2-1.3˚, respectively (King & Belyea, 2015). These values are similar to our own findings (Table 1-3).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Furthermore, FPPA provides a reliable representation of knee valgus/varus angle in the deepest landing position (Dingenen, Malfait, Vanrenterghem, Verschueren, & Staes, 2014;McLean et al, 2005;Mizner, Chmielewski, Toepke, & Tofte, 2012;Munro et al, 2012) and is a valid measure of frontalplane knee mechanics during landings when compared to 3D analysis. However, for joint angle measurements in the sagittal-plane, only Dingenen et al (2015) and King and Belyea (2015) have investigated the reliability of 2D analysis for measurements of bilateral landing activities. In all of these investigations, only peak angles for the hip, knee and ankle joints were measured.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability of two-dimensional measures associated with bilateral drop-landing performance

Howe

Bampouras

North

et al. 2020

Mov Sport Sci/Sci Mot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to establish the within-session reliability for two-dimensional (2D) video analysis of sagittal- and frontal-plane measures during bilateral drop-landing tasks. Thirty-nine recreational athletes (22 men, 17 women, age = 22 ± 4 years, height = 1.74 ± 0.15 m, body mass 70.2 ± 15.1 kg) performed five bilateral drop-landings from 50, 100 and 150% of maximum countermovement jump height, twice on the same day. Measures of reliability for initial contact angle, peak flexion angle and joint displacement for the hip, knee, and ankle joints, frontal-plane projection angles (FPPA), as well as inter-limb asymmetries in joint displacement were assessed. No systematic bias was present between trials (P>0.05). All kinematic measurements showed relative reliability ranging from large to near perfect (ICC = 0.52–0.96). Absolute reliability ranged between measures, with CV% between 1.0–1.6% for initial contact angles, 1.9–7.9% for peak flexion angles, 5.3–22.4% for joint displacement, and 1.6–2.3% for FPPA. Absolute reliability for inter-limb asymmetries in joint displacement were highly variable, with minimal detectable change values ranging from 6.0–13.2°. Therefore, 2D video analysis is a reliable tool for numerous measures related to the performance of bilateral drop-landings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability of two-dimensional measures associated with bilateral drop-landing performance

Howe

Bampouras

North

et al. 2020

Mov Sport Sci/Sci Mot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The excellent intrarater and interrater reliability found in this study was similar to that reported in other studies using healthy populations. 4,5,9 The interrater reliability of the existing literature ranged from moderate to excellent, with King and Belyea 8 reported .45 to .99 during a drop jump task, whereas Herrington and Munro 7 reported .97 to 1.0 in a single-leg landing and Mizner et al 9 reported .89 during a drop vertical jump. In terms of intrarater reliability, Herrington and Munro 7 reported .58 to .96 in a single-leg landing, whereas Mizner et al 9 reported .95 during drop vertical jump and Maykut et al 4 reported .96 to .98 during running.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Knee valgus was determined using the frontal plane projection angle formed by a line along the midline of the thigh to the center of the patella and a line from the center of the patella to a point bisecting the malleoli (Figure 1). 4,7,8 The investigator visually determined the time point of peak knee valgus for measurements.…”

Section: Data Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[3][4][5][6] In addition, the existing literature reveals moderate to excellent agreement between the 3D and 2D methods. [3][4][5][7][8][9] However, these comparisons have all been done in individuals without ACL injury/surgery. In addition, although the popularity of motion analysis application (MAA) has increased due to the cheaper cost and easy accessibility of handheld devices, only 1 study was tested with the use of a tablet device 8 that typically has a lower camera sampling frequency than other computer-based 2D motion analysis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using a Mobile Application to Assess Knee Valgus in Healthy and Post-Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Participants

Ho¹,

Deaver²,

Nelson³

et al. 2019

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Popularity of using handheld devices in clinical settings has increased, especially the use of motion analysis applications (MAAs). Video-based measurement tools have been found reliable in measuring knee valgus in subjects without anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. However, there is a need for validation of using a MAA to measure knee valgus in an injured population, given that they may exhibit higher degrees of knee valgus. Objective: To examine the reliability and validity of using a MAA to measure knee valgus during functional activities used to assess return to sport after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Design: Reliability and validity study. Setting: University laboratory. Participants: Twelve participants with ACLR and 20 healthy individuals. Interventions: Each subject performed single-leg drop landing, single-leg hop, and 90°cut with simultaneous 3-dimensional (3D) motion capture and video recording on an iPad. Main Outcome Measures: Peak knee valgus during the landing phase was measured using a MAA and 3D analysis. To obtain reliability, peak knee valgus was measured on 2 separate days. Reliability was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients and standard errors of measurement. Validity was assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients by comparing peak knee valgus between the MAA and 3D analysis. The t tests were used to compare knee valgus obtained between raters, within raters, and between the MAA and 3D analysis. Results: Our data revealed excellent intrarater and interrater reliability with low standard errors of measurement of using a MAA for both groups. Significant, moderate to large associations were found in comparing peak knee valgus between the MAA and 3D analysis. However, knee valgus was significantly different between the MAA and 3D analysis across all tasks in both groups. Conclusion: Although a MAA is reliable for measuring peak knee valgus in individuals with ACLR and healthy controls, the actual values obtained by a MAA should be viewed with caution.

show abstract

A new method for assessing landing kinematics in non-laboratory settings

Peebles

Arena

Queen

2021

Physical Therapy in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliability of Using a Handheld Tablet and Application to Measure Lower-Extremity Alignment Angles

Cited by 11 publications

References 13 publications

Reliability of two-dimensional measures associated with bilateral drop-landing performance

Reliability of two-dimensional measures associated with bilateral drop-landing performance

Using a Mobile Application to Assess Knee Valgus in Healthy and Post-Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Participants

A new method for assessing landing kinematics in non-laboratory settings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About