LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Kainz, H.; Hajek, M.; Modenese, L.; Saxby, D.J.; Lloyd, D.G.; Carty, C.P. (2017)
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
In human motion analysis predictive or functional methods are used to estimate the location of the hip joint centre (HJC). It has been shown that the Harrington regression equations (HRE) and geometric sphere fit (GSF) method are the most accurate predictive and functional methods, respectively. To date, the comparative reliability of both approaches has not been assessed. The aims of this study were to (1) compare the reliability of the HRE and the GSF methods, (2) analyse the impact of the number of thigh markers used in the GSF method on the reliability, (3) evaluate how alterations to the movements that comprise the functional trials impact HJC estimations using the GSF method, and (4) assess the influence of the initial guess in the GSF method on the HJC estimation. Fourteen healthy adults were tested on two occasions using a three-dimensional motion capturing system. Skin surface marker positions were acquired while participants performed quite stance, perturbed and non-perturbed functional trials, and walking trials. Results showed that the HRE were more reliable in locating the HJC than the GSF method. However, comparison of inter-session hip kinematics during gait did not show any significant difference between the approaches. Different initial guesses in the GSF method did not result in significant differences in the final HJC location. The GSF method was sensitive to the functional trial performance and therefore it is important to standardize the functional trial performance to ensure a repeatable estimate of the HJC when using the GSF method.
  • No references.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article