A comparison of minimum segment models for the estimation of centre of mass position and velocity for slip recovery during a bathtub transfer task
Mackenzie Collins,Iris C. Levine,Philippa C. Gosine,Roger E. Montgomery,Konika Nirmalanathan,Alison C. Novak
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2024.01.025
IF: 2.746
2024-01-26
Gait & Posture
Abstract:Background Exploring the use of minimum marker sets is important for balancing the technical quality of motion capture with challenging data collection environments and protocols. While minimum marker sets have been demonstrated to be appropriate for evaluation of some motion patterns, there is limited evidence to support model choices for abrupt, asymmetrical, non-cyclic motion such as balance disturbance during a bathtub exit task. Research question How effective are six models of reduced complexity for the estimation of centre of mass (COM) displacement and velocity, relative to a full-body model. Methods Eight participants completed a bathtub exit task. Participants received a balance perturbation as they crossed the bathtub rim, stepping from a soapy wet bathtub to a dry floor. Six reduced models were developed from the full, 72-marker, 12 segment 3D kinematic data set. Peak displacement and velocity of the body COM, and RMSE (relative to the full-body model) for displacement and velocity of the body COM were determined for each model. Results Main effects were observed for peak right, left, anterior, posterior, upwards and downwards motion, and peak left, anterior, posterior, upwards and downwards velocity. Time-varying (RMSE) was smaller for models including the thighs than models not containing the thighs. In contrast, inclusion of upper arm, forearm, and hand segments did not improve model performance. The model containing the sacrum marker only consistently performed the worst across peak and RMSE metrics. Significance Findings suggest a simplified centre of mass model may adequately capture abrupt, asymmetrical, non-cyclic tasks, such as balance disturbance recovery during obstacle crossing. A reduced kinematic model should include the thighs, trunk and pelvis segments, although models that are more complex are recommended, depending on the metrics of interest.
neurosciences,orthopedics,sport sciences