Validation of the HUMAC Balance System in Comparison with Conventional Force Plates

Koltermann, Jan Jens; Gerber, Martin; Beck, Heidrun; Beck, Michael

doi:10.3390/technologies5030044

Cited by 31 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2003, Raymakers et al were able to demonstrate in a study that there was a significant difference between the data recorded at 10 Hz and the data recorded at 50 Hz [9]. For the selection of a suitable measuring frequency, the Nyquist criterion must be observed [10]. This means that the measurement frequency has to be more than twice as large as the frequency to be measured (in this case postural fluctuation).…”

Section: Influence Of Measurement Time and Frequencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From a technical point of view, however, there is nothing to prevent working with higher sampling times in the range of more than 100 Hz. Potential noise, which is therefore increasingly measured, can be eliminated by selecting a suitable filter, for example, a low-pass filter with a cut-off frequency of 12 Hz [10].…”

Section: Influence Of Measurement Time and Frequencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this respect, to improve the reliability, it seems advisable not to consider the 5 s of a measurement in the later evaluation, since there is a predominantly unstable phase in this time range. Digital filters are usually not able to compensate for this unstable phase, since the corresponding filters cannot create any meaningful compensation due to their "charging time" [10]. In a time range over 30 s (30 < t ≤ 120), there seems to be a predominantly linear correlation (r = 0.97), so the results can be interpolated under certain conditions.…”

Section: Sampling Duration Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Validation of Different Filters for Center of Pressure Measurements by a Cross-Section Study

Koltermann

Gerber²,

Beck

et al. 2019

Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The measurement of the center of pressure (CoP) is one of the most frequently used quantitative methods for quantifying postural performance. Due to the complexity and the high biological variability of the postural control loop, a large number of different methods and parameters have been established to describe the CoP process. Furthermore, the methodological conditions such as the foot position, visual condition, sampling duration, and the data processing also have a relevant influence on the measurement results. In addition, there are various methods for recording the pressure curve, which differ in particular with regard to the filters used, the frequencies, and measurement times. The aim of the present study was the methodical comparison between different digital filters, measurement frequencies and times, and their effects on the CoP process based on a healthy reference group. The data acquisition was done with LabVIEW and the data storage was organized in a subject oriented data structure. Based on the presented results it could be seen that with a different dominant frequency in the spectrum of the group of test persons, certain filter types are required for the processing of CoP data. In the sampling range from 300 Hz to 1 kHz in the bipedal stand and 600 Hz to 1 kHz in the monopedal stand, the choice of measurement frequency had no influence on the filter result.

show abstract

Section: Influence Of Measurement Time and Frequencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Influence Of Measurement Time and Frequencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sampling Duration Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of Different Filters for Center of Pressure Measurements by a Cross-Section Study

Koltermann

Gerber²,

Beck

et al. 2019

Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…al. [34] to produce high quality and biomechanical measurement outcomes with minimal errors, similar to conventional force plates under static and dynamic conditions.…”

Section: Unanticipated and Anticipated Jump-landing Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acute effects of the Prevent injury and Enhance Performance warm-up on potential reinjury risk factors associated with unanticipated jump landings: Study protocol for a crossover randomized controlled trial in individuals cleared for return to sports after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Ashigbi

Giesche

Banzer

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn team-sports such as football or basketball, athletes need to rapidly adapt their motor plans and actions to unanticipated changes in the environment. Unanticipated jump-landing tasks have been found to elevate the risk of non-contact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries compared to an anticipated condition. ACL-reconstructed individuals may have greater difficulties to maintain neuromuscular control under unanticipated conditions exposing them to a higher reinjury risk during the game. The planned trial aims to investigate the acute effects of a team-sport specific injury prevention programme on potential ACL reinjury risk factors under anticipated and unanticipated jump-landings.Methods and design:Single center randomized controlled crossover trial. Female and male ACL-reconstructed participants cleared for return to sports (≥ 6 months and ≤ 24 months post-reconstruction) will be included. In a randomized sequence and with a washout phase of one week in between, the participants will perform an injury preventive warm-up protocol (PEP; strengthening, flexibility, plyometry and agility) and a standard warm-up program (bicycle ergometer). Both interventions will last for 12 minutes and will be conducted at moderate intensity (BORG scale: 12 to 14). After each warm-up, participants will perform counter movement jumps with single-leg landings on a force plate. Prior to the jump, a left or right footprint (equally distributed) will be indicated on a screen. Under the anticipated condition, the participants will be informed before the jump that the displayed footprint will not change after take-off. Under the unanticipated condition, the participants will not know whether the target landing side will remain the same (consistent with pre-movement expectations) or change (inconsistent). Under both unanticipated conditions, this information will be displayed 0.1 second after take-off and thus approximately 0.3 seconds before landing.Parametric/non-parametric crossover-analyses (carryover-tests and crossover test) for between-conditions comparisons will be applied. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register, identification number DRKS00016942. Registered on May 24, 2019.

show abstract

“…For reliable simulation of a one-dimensional, time-constant reference movement, a mechanical pendulum was used (see Koltermann et al [20]). This apparatus (see Figure 1, left) generates a dynamic, reproducible CoP track over the time used for the analysis.…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of Various Filters and Sampling Parameters for a COP Analysis

Koltermann

Gerber²,

Beck

et al. 2018

Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The center of pressure (CoP) is one of the most utilized quantitative measurements describing postural competency. Due to the complexity and biological variability of postural regulatory systems, a myriad of different methods and parameters have been established describing the CoP trajectory. Besides procedural variables, such as foot position, visual condition, and sampling duration, the method of data collection itself has a relevant effect on the result of the measurement. Furthermore, different methods for recording the measured data have been developed, which differ regarding the filters, frequencies, and test durations used. The goal of this study was the methodical comparison of various filters, measurement frequencies, and measurement duration, with respect to their effects on the CoP trajectory. Based on the results presented, we demonstrate that the Butterworth and Bessel filters can be recommended for analysis of CoP data, and at the very least, a second-order filter should be chosen for the process. For assessment of the cutoff frequency, a technical pendulum was used to show that a cutoff frequency of 13 Hz provided reliable data and it can be inferred that a 100 Hz sampling rate would be the minimum requirement.

show abstract

Validation of the HUMAC Balance System in Comparison with Conventional Force Plates

Cited by 31 publications

References 20 publications

Validation of Different Filters for Center of Pressure Measurements by a Cross-Section Study

Validation of Different Filters for Center of Pressure Measurements by a Cross-Section Study

Acute effects of the Prevent injury and Enhance Performance warm-up on potential reinjury risk factors associated with unanticipated jump landings: Study protocol for a crossover randomized controlled trial in individuals cleared for return to sports after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Validation of Various Filters and Sampling Parameters for a COP Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About