Concurrent validity of inertial measurement units in range of motion measurements of upper extremity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Li, Jinfeng [1 ]
Qiu, Fanji [2 ]
Gan, Liaoyan [3 ]
Chou, Li-Shan [1 ]
机构
[1] Iowa State Univ, Dept Kinesiol, Ames, IA 50011 USA
[2] Humboldt Univ, Inst Sport Sci, Movement Biomech, Berlin, Germany
[3] Univ Alberta, Coll Hlth Sci, Fac Kinesiol Sport & Recreat, Edmonton, AB, Canada
来源
WEARABLE TECHNOLOGIES | 2024年 / 5卷
关键词
Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU); Movement Analysis; Upper Extremity; UPPER-LIMB; VALIDATION; KINEMATICS; ACCURACY; CAPTURE; REPEATABILITY; RELIABILITY; CALIBRATION;
D O I
10.1017/wtc.2024.6
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Inertial measurement units (IMUs) have proven to be valuable tools in measuring the range of motion (RoM) of human upper limb joints. Although several studies have reported on the validity of IMUs compared to the gold standard (optical motion capture system, OMC), a quantitative summary of the accuracy of IMUs in measuring RoM of upper limb joints is still lacking. Thus, the primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the concurrent validity of IMUs for measuring RoM of the upper extremity in adults. Fifty-one articles were included in the systematic review, and data from 16 were pooled for meta-analysis. Concurrent validity is excellent for shoulder flexion-extension (Pearson's r = 0.969 [0.935, 0.986], ICC = 0.935 [0.749, 0.984], mean difference = -3.19 (p = 0.55)), elbow flexion-extension (Pearson's r = 0.954 [0.929, 0.970], ICC = 0.929 [0.814, 0.974], mean difference = 10.61 (p = 0.36)), wrist flexion-extension (Pearson's r = 0.974 [0.945, 0.988], mean difference = -4.20 (p = 0.58)), good to excellent for shoulder abduction-adduction (Pearson's r = 0.919 [0.848, 0.957], ICC = 0.840 [0.430, 0.963], mean difference = -7.10 (p = 0.50)), and elbow pronation-supination (Pearson's r = 0.966 [0.939, 0.981], ICC = 0.821 [0.696, 0.900]). There are some inconsistent results for shoulder internal-external rotation (Pearson's r = 0.939 [0.894, 0.965], mean difference = -9.13 (p < 0.0001)). In conclusion, the results support IMU as a viable instrument for measuring RoM of upper extremity, but for some specific joint movements, such as shoulder rotation and wrist ulnar-radial deviation, IMU measurements need to be used with caution.
引用
收藏
页数:35
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis of the upper extremity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy
    Patel, Payal
    Braun, Cody
    Patel, Parth
    Bhatt, Meha
    Begum, Housne
    Wiercioch, Wojtek
    Varghese, Jamie
    Wooldridge, David
    Alturkmani, Hani J.
    Thomas, Merrill
    Baig, Mariam
    Bahaj, Waled
    Khatib, Rasha
    Kehar, Rohan
    Ponnapureddy, Rakesh
    Sethi, Anchal
    Mustafa, Ahmad
    Lim, Wendy
    Le Gal, Gregoire
    Bates, Shannon M.
    Lang, Eddy
    Righini, Marc
    Husainat, Nedaa M.
    Kalot, Mohamad A.
    Al Jabiri, Yazan Nayif
    Nieuwlaat, Robby
    Schunemann, Holger J.
    Mustafa, Reem A.
    BLOOD ADVANCES, 2020, 4 (11) : 2516 - 2522
  • [32] Upper extremity bone mineral content asymmetries in tennis players: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chapelle, Laurent
    Rommers, Nikki
    Clarys, Peter
    D'Hondt, Eva
    Taeymans, Jan
    JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES, 2019, 37 (09) : 988 - 997
  • [33] Trunk Restraint to Promote Upper Extremity Recovery in Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Wee, Seng Kwee
    Hughes, Ann-Marie
    Warner, Martin
    Burridge, Jane H.
    NEUROREHABILITATION AND NEURAL REPAIR, 2014, 28 (07) : 660 - 677
  • [34] Complication rates among patients treated for upper extremity thrombosis: a meta-analysis and systematic review
    Tan, M.
    Carrier, M.
    Huisman, M., V
    Rodger, M.
    JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2013, 11 : 339 - 340
  • [35] RBANS Validity Indices: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Robert D. Shura
    Timothy W. Brearly
    Jared A. Rowland
    Sarah L. Martindale
    Holly M. Miskey
    Kevin Duff
    Neuropsychology Review, 2018, 28 : 269 - 284
  • [36] RBANS Validity Indices: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Shura, Robert D.
    Brearly, Timothy W.
    Rowland, Jared A.
    Martindale, Sarah L.
    Miskey, Holly M.
    Duff, Kevin
    NEUROPSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2018, 28 (03) : 269 - 284
  • [37] Acute Effects of Various Stretching Techniques on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis
    David George Behm
    Shahab Alizadeh
    Abdolhamid Daneshjoo
    Saman Hadjizadeh Anvar
    Andrew Graham
    Ali Zahiri
    Reza Goudini
    Chris Edwards
    Robyn Culleton
    Carina Scharf
    Andreas Konrad
    Sports Medicine - Open, 9
  • [38] Does femoroacetabular impingement syndrome affect range of motion? A systematic review with meta-analysis
    Albertoni, Davide Bruno
    Gianola, Silvia
    Bargeri, Silvia
    Hoxhaj, Ilda
    Munari, Alice
    Maffulli, Nicola
    Castellini, Greta
    BRITISH MEDICAL BULLETIN, 2023, 145 (01) : 45 - 59
  • [39] Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Afonso, Jose
    Ramirez-Campillo, Rodrigo
    Moscao, Joao
    Rocha, Tiago
    Zacca, Rodrigo
    Martins, Alexandre
    Milheiro, Andre A.
    Ferreira, Joao
    Sarmento, Hugo
    Clemente, Filipe Manuel
    HEALTHCARE, 2021, 9 (04)
  • [40] Acute Effects of Various Stretching Techniques on Range of Motion: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis
    Behm, David George
    Alizadeh, Shahab
    Daneshjoo, Abdolhamid
    Anvar, Saman Hadjizadeh
    Graham, Andrew
    Zahiri, Ali
    Goudini, Reza
    Edwards, Chris
    Culleton, Robyn
    Scharf, Carina
    Konrad, Andreas
    SPORTS MEDICINE-OPEN, 2023, 9 (01)