The use of inertial sensors system for human motion analysis.
The use of inertial sensors system for human motion analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1179/1743288x11y.0000000006
复制
发表时间：
2010-12
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Williams JM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cuesta-Vargas AI;Galán-Mercant A;Williams JM
本文的目的是系统地回顾和批判性地评价围绕研究的文献，将惯性传感器与任何一种金标准进行比较;这个金标准必须是测量人体运动的工具（例如，电测角术，光电系统，电磁系统等）。对已发表的英文文章进行了MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、PEDRO和SCOPUS检索，重点是将惯性传感器与任何类型的金标准（例如，电测角术、光电系统、电磁系统等）进行比较的文章，2000 - 2010年两名独立的评审员完成了研究选择、质量评估和数据提取。关键评估技能计划西班牙语工具被用来评估研究质量，并进行了系统之间的可靠性比较。对242篇文章中的14篇进行了审查，这些文章显示出与样本选择和操作员设盲相关的有效性威胁。其他研究的局限性进行了讨论。不同系统之间的比较显示，在一系列任务和解剖区域之间具有良好的一致性。本文认为惯性传感器是研究人体运动的一种准确可靠的方法，但其准确性和可靠性程度取决于特定的场地和任务。
The aim of this article is to review systematically and appraise critically the literature surrounding the research, comparing inertial sensors with any kind of gold standard; this gold standard has to be a tool for measuring human movement (e.g. electrogoniometry, optoelectronic systems, electromagnetic systems, etc.). A MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDRo and SCOPUS search of published English language articles was conducted, which focused on articles that compared inertial sensors to any kind of gold standard (e.g. electrogoniometry, optoelectronic systems, electromagnetic systems, etc.), from 2000 to 2010. Two independent reviewers completed the study selection, quality appraisal and data extraction. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Español tool was used to assess study quality, and a reliability comparison between the systems was made. Fourteen out of 242 articles were reviewed, which displayed a similar threat to validity, relating to sample selection and operator blinding. Other study limitations are discussed. A comparison between the different systems showed good agreement across a range of tasks and anatomical regions. This review concludes that inertial sensors can offer an accurate and reliable method to study human motion, but the degree of accuracy and reliability is site and task specific.