TY - JOUR
T1 - Verification of acromion marker cluster and scapula spinal marker cluster methods for tracking shoulder kinematics
T2 - a comparative study with upright four-dimensional computed tomography
AU - Yoshida, Yuki
AU - Matsumura, Noboru
AU - Yamada, Yoshitake
AU - Miyamoto, Azusa
AU - Oki, Satoshi
AU - Yamada, Minoru
AU - Yokoyama, Yoichi
AU - Nakamura, Masaya
AU - Nagura, Takeo
AU - Jinzaki, Masahiro
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/12
Y1 - 2024/12
N2 - Background: This study validated the accuracy of the acromion marker cluster (AMC) and scapula spinal marker cluster (SSMC) methods compared with upright four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) analysis. Methods: Sixteen shoulders of eight healthy males underwent AMC and SSMC assessments. Active shoulder elevation was tracked using upright 4DCT and optical motion capture system. The scapulothoracic and glenohumeral rotation angles calculated from AMC and SSMC were compared with 4DCT. Additionally, the motion of these marker clusters on the skin with shoulder elevation was evaluated. Results: The average differences between AMC and 4DCT during 10°−140° of humerothoracic elevation were − 2.2° ± 7.5° in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 14.0° ± 7.4° in internal rotation, 6.5° ± 7.5° in posterior tilting, 3.7° ± 8.1° in glenohumeral elevation, − 8.3° ± 10.7° in external rotation, and − 8.6° ± 8.9° in anterior plane of elevation. The difference between AMC and 4DCT was significant at 120° of humerothoracic elevation in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 50° in internal rotation, 90° in posterior tilting, 120° in glenohumeral elevation, 100° in external rotation, and 100° in anterior plane of elevation. However, the average differences between SSMC and 4DCT were − 7.5 ± 7.7° in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 2.0° ± 7.0° in internal rotation, 2.3° ± 7.2° in posterior tilting, 8.8° ± 7.9° in glenohumeral elevation, 2.0° ± 9.1° in external rotation, and 1.9° ± 10.1° in anterior plane of elevation. The difference between SSMC and 4DCT was significant at 50° of humerothoracic elevation in scapulothoracic upward rotation and 60° in glenohumeral elevation, with no significant differences observed in other rotations. Skin motion was significantly smaller in AMC (28.7 ± 4.0 mm) than SSMC (38.6 ± 5.8 mm). Although there was smaller skin motion in AMC, SSMC exhibited smaller differences in scapulothoracic internal rotation, posterior tilting, glenohumeral external rotation, and anterior plane of elevation compared to 4DCT. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that AMC is more accurate for assessing scapulothoracic upward rotation and glenohumeral elevation, while SSMC is preferable for evaluating scapulothoracic internal rotation, posterior tilting, glenohumeral external rotation, and anterior plane of elevation, with smaller differences compared to 4DCT.
AB - Background: This study validated the accuracy of the acromion marker cluster (AMC) and scapula spinal marker cluster (SSMC) methods compared with upright four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) analysis. Methods: Sixteen shoulders of eight healthy males underwent AMC and SSMC assessments. Active shoulder elevation was tracked using upright 4DCT and optical motion capture system. The scapulothoracic and glenohumeral rotation angles calculated from AMC and SSMC were compared with 4DCT. Additionally, the motion of these marker clusters on the skin with shoulder elevation was evaluated. Results: The average differences between AMC and 4DCT during 10°−140° of humerothoracic elevation were − 2.2° ± 7.5° in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 14.0° ± 7.4° in internal rotation, 6.5° ± 7.5° in posterior tilting, 3.7° ± 8.1° in glenohumeral elevation, − 8.3° ± 10.7° in external rotation, and − 8.6° ± 8.9° in anterior plane of elevation. The difference between AMC and 4DCT was significant at 120° of humerothoracic elevation in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 50° in internal rotation, 90° in posterior tilting, 120° in glenohumeral elevation, 100° in external rotation, and 100° in anterior plane of elevation. However, the average differences between SSMC and 4DCT were − 7.5 ± 7.7° in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 2.0° ± 7.0° in internal rotation, 2.3° ± 7.2° in posterior tilting, 8.8° ± 7.9° in glenohumeral elevation, 2.0° ± 9.1° in external rotation, and 1.9° ± 10.1° in anterior plane of elevation. The difference between SSMC and 4DCT was significant at 50° of humerothoracic elevation in scapulothoracic upward rotation and 60° in glenohumeral elevation, with no significant differences observed in other rotations. Skin motion was significantly smaller in AMC (28.7 ± 4.0 mm) than SSMC (38.6 ± 5.8 mm). Although there was smaller skin motion in AMC, SSMC exhibited smaller differences in scapulothoracic internal rotation, posterior tilting, glenohumeral external rotation, and anterior plane of elevation compared to 4DCT. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that AMC is more accurate for assessing scapulothoracic upward rotation and glenohumeral elevation, while SSMC is preferable for evaluating scapulothoracic internal rotation, posterior tilting, glenohumeral external rotation, and anterior plane of elevation, with smaller differences compared to 4DCT.
KW - Attachment position
KW - Biomechanics
KW - Motion capture
KW - Scapula spine
KW - Scapular tracking
KW - Shoulder motion
KW - Upright computed tomography
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85199810911
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85199810911#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1186/s12891-024-07717-2
DO - 10.1186/s12891-024-07717-2
M3 - Article
C2 - 39060988
AN - SCOPUS:85199810911
SN - 1471-2474
VL - 25
JO - BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
JF - BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
IS - 1
M1 - 589
ER -