ArticleJournal of biomechanics2016
Characterizing fluoroscopy based kinematic accuracy as a function of pulse width and velocity.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Techniques for In Vivo Measurement of Ligament and Tendon Strain: A Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2021Review
- Tibiofemoral Cartilage Contact Differences Between Level Walking and Downhill Running.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2019Article
- In vivo validation of patellofemoral kinematics during overground gait and stair ascent.Gait & posture · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fluoroscopic imaging has become increasingly popular to investigate total knee arthroplasty kinematics non-invasively - 3D implant models are aligned with 2D image projections, and optimized via an edge-contour alignment technique. Previous studies have quantified the accuracy of this approach, however they do not always adequately address the impact of image collection parameters. A particularly sensitive parameter is the pulse width, or exposure time per frame. At longer pulse widths, more motion is captured in a single frame; this can lead to image blur and subsequent degradation to image edge quality. Therefore, the comparative accuracy of relative joint kinematics as a function of pulse width and joint velocity needs to be defined. A limits of agreement approach was taken to define the mean differences between optoelectric kinematic measures (gold standard) and fluoroscopic methods at various pulse widths (1, 8 and 16ms) and knee velocities (50, 100 and 225°/s). The mean absolute differences between the optoelectric and fluoroscopic methods for 1ms pulse width were less than 1.5° and 0.9mm. Comparable rotational differences (1.3°) were observed for the 8ms pulse width but had larger translational differences (1.4mm). The 16ms pulse width yielded the greatest mean differences (2.0° and 1.6mm), which increased with knee flexion velocity. The importance of pulse width and velocity should not be overlooked for future studies - this parameter has proven to be a sensitive metric in the quantification of joint motion via fluoroscopy and must be identified and reported in future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.