Gait & posture · 2022
Between-day reliability and minimum detectable change of the Conventional Gait Model 2 and Plug-in Gait Model during running.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Okahisa Tetsuya, Matsuura Tetsuya, Tomonari Ken, Komatsu Kouji, Yokoyama Kenji, Iwase Joji, Yamada Megumi, Sairyo Koichi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Plug-in Gait model (PiG) is commonly used in 3D motion analysis but has limited reliability. Although an improved version of PiG has been developed, called the Conventional Gait Model 2 (CGM2), there is limited evidence on its between-day reliability for running.
RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the between-day intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC3,k) and minimum detectable change (MDC) of lower limb kinematics and kinetics for CGM2 during running and does reliability differ between CGM2 and PiG.
METHODS: Twenty-three healthy participants performed running at a comfortable speed in two identical test sessions at least 5 days apart. Lower limb kinematic and kinetic data in the three planes of motion were calculated using CGM2 and PiG. The ICC and MDC were calculated for the kinematic and kinetic parameters at initial contact and peak during the stance phase of running.
RESULTS: CGM2 kinematics showed good-to-excellent reliability (ICC: 0.75-0.93), except for hip extension and ankle internal rotation, and less than 5° MDC (1.8°-4.9°) of the coronal and sagittal planes, except for hip extension. PiG showed poor-to-moderate reliability (ICC: -0.15 to 0.72) in the coronal and transverse planes and greater than 5° MDC (5.0°-21.8°), except for knee extension, adduction, and ankle dorsiflexion. CGM2 showed good-to-excellent reliability for peak kinetics (ICC: 0.75-0.97), except for hip internal rotation and knee extension. The ICC and MDC were higher for CGM2 than PiG, with significant differences in the coronal plane of the hip and knee joints and transverse plane of the hip joint in kinematics and in the sagittal and coronal plane of the hip and knee joints in kinetics.
SIGNIFICANCE: The between-day reliability of CGM2 was mostly good to excellent for lower limb kinematics and kinetics during running. We believe that CGM2 can more accurately assess kinematic differences between the coronal and transverse planes than the PiG.
RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the between-day intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC3,k) and minimum detectable change (MDC) of lower limb kinematics and kinetics for CGM2 during running and does reliability differ between CGM2 and PiG.
METHODS: Twenty-three healthy participants performed running at a comfortable speed in two identical test sessions at least 5 days apart. Lower limb kinematic and kinetic data in the three planes of motion were calculated using CGM2 and PiG. The ICC and MDC were calculated for the kinematic and kinetic parameters at initial contact and peak during the stance phase of running.
RESULTS: CGM2 kinematics showed good-to-excellent reliability (ICC: 0.75-0.93), except for hip extension and ankle internal rotation, and less than 5° MDC (1.8°-4.9°) of the coronal and sagittal planes, except for hip extension. PiG showed poor-to-moderate reliability (ICC: -0.15 to 0.72) in the coronal and transverse planes and greater than 5° MDC (5.0°-21.8°), except for knee extension, adduction, and ankle dorsiflexion. CGM2 showed good-to-excellent reliability for peak kinetics (ICC: 0.75-0.97), except for hip internal rotation and knee extension. The ICC and MDC were higher for CGM2 than PiG, with significant differences in the coronal plane of the hip and knee joints and transverse plane of the hip joint in kinematics and in the sagittal and coronal plane of the hip and knee joints in kinetics.
SIGNIFICANCE: The between-day reliability of CGM2 was mostly good to excellent for lower limb kinematics and kinetics during running. We believe that CGM2 can more accurately assess kinematic differences between the coronal and transverse planes than the PiG.