Author:
Wishaupt Koen,Schallig Wouter,van Dorst Marleen H.,Buizer Annemieke I.,van der Krogt Marjolein M.
Abstract
AbstractThe aim of this comparative, cross-sectional study was to determine whether markerless motion capture can track deviating gait patterns in children with cerebral palsy (CP) to a similar extent as marker-based motion capturing. Clinical gait analysis (CGA) was performed for 30 children with spastic CP and 15 typically developing (TD) children. Marker data were processed with the Human Body Model and video files with Theia3D markerless software, to calculate joint angles for both systems. Statistical parametric mapping paired t-tests were used to compare the trunk, pelvis, hip, knee and ankle joint angles, for both TD and CP, as well as for the deviation from the norm in the CP group. Individual differences were quantified using mean absolute differences. Markerless motion capture was able to track frontal plane angles and sagittal plane knee and ankle angles well, but individual deviations in pelvic tilt and transverse hip rotation as present in CP were not captured by the system. Markerless motion capture is a promising new method for CGA in children with CP, but requires improvement to better capture several clinically relevant deviations especially in pelvic tilt and transverse hip rotation.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference37 articles.
1. Graham, H. K. et al. Cerebral palsy. Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers 2, 15082 (2016).
2. Novak, I. et al. State of the evidence traffic lights 2019: Systematic review of interventions for preventing and treating children with cerebral palsy. Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 20, 1–21 (2020).
3. Rosenbaum, P. L. et al. Prognosis for gross motor function in cerebral palsy: Creation of motor development curves. JAMA 288, 1357–1363 (2002).
4. Rosenbaum, P. et al. A report: The definition and classification of cerebral palsy April 2006. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. Suppl. 109, 8–14 (2007).
5. Baker, R., Esquenazi, A., Benedetti, M. G. & Desloovere, K. Gait analysis: clinical facts. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med 52, 560–574 (2016).