A prosthesis-specific multi-link segment model
This paper aimed to investigate the impact of the marker set and the calculation model on analysis of a repetitive sprint movement in a transtibial amputee. The geometry and inertial properties of the calculation model significantly affected the result calculated for all of the variables on the amputated side. On the non-amputated side, the hip, knee and ankle flexion and power were affected significantly (but to a lesser extent than the amputated side). Marker placement affected all variables on the amputated side only.
Information on training regimes for amputees are often defined using data and analysis for able-bodied individuals. This leads to inaccuracies when a rigid-link segment model is applied to these individuals. There are other methods of calculation that can be applied, however these also does not account for the properties prosthetic components.
Further to this, there are two possible types of marker sets. Therefore this paper aimed to investigate the impact of the marker set and the calculation model.
The repetitive sprint movement for analysis was completed by a right-sided transtibial amputee. All factors for calculation had an impact on the results, the placement of the prosthetic ankle marker had most marked influence on variables. However, this study looked at just one participant and should be investigated further.
Why do you think that placement of the markers influences results?
> From: Rigney et al., J Biomech (2016) (Epub ahead of print). All rights reserved to Elsevier Ltd. Click here for the Pubmed summary.