Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42115871›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026

Assessment of dynamic knee angle deviations in the frontal plane in physiotherapy clinical practice: intra- and inter-rater reliability of an application and agreement with two AI-models.

Lukas Janisch, Lilo-Marie Maack, Dominik Fohrmann, Carlos J Marques

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Lukas Janisch *Department Performance, Neuroscience, Therapy and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Program Bachelor of Science Physiotherapy, Am Kaiserkai 1, Hamburg, D-20457, Germany.
Lilo-Marie Maack *Department Performance, Neuroscience, Therapy and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Program Bachelor of Science Physiotherapy, Am Kaiserkai 1, Hamburg, D-20457, Germany.
Dominik FohrmannFaculty of Medicine, Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0032-9936
Carlos J MarquesDepartment Performance, Neuroscience, Therapy and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Program Bachelor of Science Physiotherapy, Am Kaiserkai 1, Hamburg, D-20457, Germany. carlos.marques@medicalschool-hamburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3216-6382

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFunctional leg axis deviations, particularly dynamic knee valgus (DKV), are considered key risk factors for lower-extremity injuries. In physiotherapy practice there are no standardized tools to quantitatively assess functional leg axis deviations within a treatment session. While application-based 2D analyses offer accessible options, the agreement between manual and automated, AI-based Human Pose Estimation (HPE) methods remains underexplored. Here, the aims were to investigate the intra- and inter-rater reliability of a manual application-based method (PhysioMaster®); to quantify the agreement between two AI-based HPE models (OpenPose, BlazePose); and to explore which functional test, Single-Leg Squat (SLS), Single-Leg Hop for Distance (SLH), or Single-Leg Landing (SLL), elicits the most pronounced leg axis deviations.

methodsSixteen healthy adults (8 females) performed three standardized single-leg tasks (SLS, SLH, SLL) with each leg. Knee angles in the frontal plane were measured from monocular video images using the PhysioMaster® application (two raters × two ratings) and compared with automated 2D analyses using OpenPose and BlazePose. Reliability and agreement were evaluated using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients, Lin's Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC), and Bland-Altman analyses. Linear Mixed Model (LMM) analyses were carried out to explore which functional task would be the most effective.

resultsThe PhysioMaster® application showed excellent intra- and inter-rater reliability across all tests (ICC ≥ 0.95). OpenPose demonstrated excellent agreement with manual application-based measurements (CCC = 0.95; Bias = 0.87°; LoA = -4.32° to 6.05°), while BlazePose achieved good agreement (CCC = 0.89; Bias = -0.67°; LoA = -8.76° to 7.42°). LMM analyses revealed that all three tasks significantly evoked knee angle deviations. The SLL evoked the largest valgus angles (Estimate = -8.29°, p < .001), while the SLS elicited the highest varus angles (Estimate = 7.92°, p < .001).

conclusionBoth, manual application-based and AI-based 2D methods, provided reliable and largely consistent assessments of knee valgus angles in the frontal plane during functional testing. OpenPose achieved the best agreement with manual application-based reference values, and the SLL was the most suitable task for detecting DKV. While the results support the integration of manual application-based and AI-assisted posture analysis into clinical physiotherapy, further research on concurrent validity of all three methods used against 3D motion capture is needed.

Indexed as

Knee JointPhysical Therapy ModalitiesAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansMaleObserver VariationRange of Motion, ArticularReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultAI-Based Human Pose EstimationAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuryFunctional AssessmentsInjury preventionKnee kineticsPrehabRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID42115871
PMCPMC13162436

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.