Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36772783›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Validity and Reliability of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)-Derived 3D Joint Kinematics in Persons Wearing Transtibial Prosthesis.

Jutima Rattanakoch, Manunchaya Samala, Weerawat Limroongreungrat, Gary Guerra, Kittichai Tharawadeepimuk, Ampika Nanbancha, Wisavaporn Niamsang, Pichitpol Kerdsomnuek, Sarit Suwanmana

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jutima RattanakochSirindhorn School of Prosthetics and Orthotics, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-2188-5672
Manunchaya SamalaSirindhorn School of Prosthetics and Orthotics, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-6244-7209
Weerawat LimroongreungratCollege of Sports Science and Technology, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-3431-1793
Gary GuerraExercise and Sport Science Department, St. Mary's University, San Antonio, TX 78228, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0161-4616
Kittichai TharawadeepimukCollege of Sports Science and Technology, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand.
Ampika NanbanchaCollege of Sports Science and Technology, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand.
Wisavaporn NiamsangSirindhorn School of Prosthetics and Orthotics, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-0887-9315
Pichitpol KerdsomnuekDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand.
Sarit SuwanmanaCollege of Sports Science and Technology, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand.

Funding

Mahidol University Mini-Research Cluster (MU-MINIRC) R016520005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA validity and reliability assessment of inertial measurement unit (IMU)-derived joint angular kinematics during walking is a necessary step for motion analysis in the lower extremity prosthesis user population. This study aimed to assess the accuracy and reliability of an inertial measurement unit (IMU) system compared to an optical motion capture (OMC) system in transtibial prosthesis (TTP) users.

methodsThirty TTP users were recruited and underwent simultaneous motion capture from IMU and OMC systems during walking. Reliability and validity were assessed using intra- and inter-subject variability with standard deviation (S.D.), average S.D., and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

resultsThe intra-subject S.D. for all rotations of the lower limb joints were less than 1° for both systems. The IMU system had a lower mean S.D. (

conclusionAll joint angular kinematic comparisons supported the IMU system's results as comparable to OMC. The IMU was capable of precise sagittal plane motion data and demonstrated validity and reliability to OMC. These findings evidence that when compared to OMC, an IMU system may serve well in evaluating the gait of lower limb prosthesis users.

Indexed as

Artificial LimbsGaitBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansReproducibility of ResultsWalkinggait parameters assessmentinertial measurement unit (IMU)intra- and inter-subject variabilityoptical motion capture (OMC)transtibial prosthesis

Identifiers

PMID36772783
PMCPMC9920655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.