![postview principal curvature postview principal curvature](https://architectureincombination.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/pclcomp.png)
Subject-specific hip geometry and hip joint centre location affects calculated contact forces at the hip during gait. Accuracy and feasibility of dual fluoroscopy and model-based tracking to quantify in vivo hip kinematics during clinical exams. Estimation of the hip joint centre in human motion analysis: a systematic review. Clinical applicability of using spherical fitting to find hip joint centers. Specimen-specific predictions of contact stress under physiological loading in the human hip: validation and sensitivity studies. Three-dimensional quantification of femoral head shape in controls and patients with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement. Prediction of the hip joint centre in adults, children, and patients with cerebral palsy based on magnetic resonance imaging. Quantification of pelvic soft tissue artifact in multiple static positions. Soft-tissue artefact assessment during step-up using fluoroscopy and skin-mounted markers. A comparison of lower-extremity skeletal kinematics measured using skin- and pin-mounted markers. The SCoRE residual: a quality index to assess the accuracy of joint estimations. Part 4: assessment of anatomical landmark misplacement and its effects on joint kinematics. Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry. A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique. An optimized protocol for hip joint centre determination using the functional method. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Validation of a new model-based tracking technique for measuring three-dimensional, in vivo glenohumeral joint kinematics. A comparison of the accuracy of several hip center location prediction methods. Effects of movement for estimating the hip joint centre.
Postview principal curvature skin#
However, the improvements observed when using the DF-based solutions suggest that skin motion artifact is a large source of error for the functional methods.īegon, M., T. Overall, functional methods were superior to predictive methods for HJC estimation.
![postview principal curvature postview principal curvature](https://doubtnut-static.s.llnwi.net/static/question-thumbnail/hi_67775651.png)
The Harrington method was the best predictive technique using both skin markers (13.2 ± 6.5 mm) and DF-based solutions (10.6 ± 2.5 mm). Using skin markers, functional methods had better mean agreement with the HJC measured by DF (11.0 ± 3.3 mm) than predictive methods (18.1 ± 9.5 mm) estimates from functional and predictive methods improved when using the DF-based solutions (1.3 ± 0.9 and 17.5 ± 8.6 mm, respectively). Additionally, DF-based solutions generated virtual markers placed on bony landmarks, which were input to the predictive and functional methods to determine if estimates of the HJC improved. Eleven non-pathologic subjects were imaged with DF and reflective skin marker motion capture. Using dual fluoroscopy as the reference standard, we then assessed the accuracy of three predictive and two functional methods. In this study, we used dual fluoroscopy (DF) (a dynamic X-ray imaging technique) and three-dimensional reconstructions from computed tomography images, to measure HJC locations in vivo. Quantifying the accuracy of these methods is an area of open investigation. Skin motion artifact may introduce errors in the estimate of HJC for both techniques. Here, predictive techniques use regression equations of pelvic anatomy to estimate the HJC, whereas functional methods track motion of markers placed at the pelvis and femur during a coordinated motion. Most often, the hip joint center (HJC) is derived from locations of reflective markers adhered to the skin. Predictions from biomechanical models of gait may be sensitive to joint center locations.