Cited by 10Lower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesMuscle activation and electromyography studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Estimating soft tissue artifact of the thigh in high knee flexion tasks using optical motion Capture: Implications for marker cluster placement

Buchman-Pearle, Jessa M., Acker, Stacey M.·2021·Journal of Biomechanics

Abstract

Soft tissue artifact in motion capture is widely accepted as a significant source of error in kinematic and kinetic measurements. Non-invasive methods of estimating soft tissue artifact, those requiring only motion capture, provide a feasible method to evaluate marker placement on a segment and enable recommendations for marker configurations which can minimize soft tissue artifact. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of thigh marker cluster location on soft tissue artifact during high knee flexion (>120 deg) as unique deformation of soft tissue occurs in this range (e.g. thigh-calf contact). Motion of the pelvis and lower limbs were recorded during squatting and kneeling in fifty participants. Six rigid marker clusters were affixed to the skin on the anterior, lateral, and anterolateral aspect, at the distal and middle third of the thighs. To estimate soft tissue artifact, the functional hip joint center was reconstructed relative to the pelvis cluster and each of the six thigh clusters throughout motion. The difference in the position of these two points was input into Bland-Altman analyses and compared between the thigh clusters. Across the tasks, the total mean difference ranged from 2.81 to 8.95 cm while the lower and upper limits of agreement ranged from -0.79 to 2.54 cm and 5.04 to 17.65 cm, respectively. Using this non-invasive method, the mid-anterolateral cluster was least susceptible to soft tissue artifact and thus would be recommended, while the lateral clusters were most susceptible and should avoided in high knee flexion and similar tasks.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110659

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The predictable widening of error thresholds at P2-particularly for hip flexion-likely reflects increased tissue tension and potential displacement of skin-mounted markers at maximal joint range.

    “the predictable widening of error thresholds observed at P2—particularly for hip flexion—likely reflects increased tissue tension and potential displacement of skin-mounted markers at maximal joint range [49,50].”

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 55 · Cited by 10

Metadata

Authors
Buchman-Pearle, J. M., & Acker, S. M.
Affiliations
University of Waterloo (CA)
Corresponding author
Acker, Stacey M.
Venue
Journal of Biomechanics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-10
Volume
127
Pages
110659
ISSN
0021-9290 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3187977304
Cited by
10
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2
FWCI
0.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Biomechanics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (04109)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
soft tissue artifacts, marker placement, squatting, kneeling, optical motion capture
MeSH terms
Biomechanical Phenomena, Humans, Knee Joint, Leg, Thigh, Range of Motion, Articular, Artifacts

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review