Document Type
Article
Language
English
Publication Date
5-2017
Publisher
Elsevier
Source Publication
Medical Engineering & Physics
Source ISSN
1350-4533
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to quantify the accuracy and precision of a biplane fluoroscopy system for model-based tracking of in vivo hindfoot motion during over-ground gait. Gait was simulated by manually manipulating a cadaver foot specimen through a biplane fluoroscopy system attached to a walkway. Three 1.6-mm diameter steel beads were implanted into the specimen to provide marker-based tracking measurements for comparison to model-based tracking. A CT scan was acquired to define a gold standard of implanted bead positions and to create 3D models for model-based tracking. Static and dynamic trials manipulating the specimen through the capture volume were performed. Marker-based tracking error was calculated relative to the gold standard implanted bead positions. The bias, precision, and root-mean-squared (RMS) error of model-based tracking was calculated relative to the marker-based measurements. The overall RMS error of the model-based tracking method averaged 0.43 ± 0.22 mm and 0.66 ± 0.43° for static and 0.59 ± 0.10 mm and 0.71 ± 0.12° for dynamic trials. The model-based tracking approach represents a non-invasive technique for accurately measuring dynamic hindfoot joint motion during in vivo, weight bearing conditions. The model-based tracking method is recommended for application on the basis of the study results.
Recommended Citation
Cross, Janelle A.; McHenry, Ben; Molthen, Robert C.; Exten, Emily; Gilat-Schmidt, Taly; and Harris, Gerald F., "Biplane Fluoroscopy for Hindfoot Motion Analysis during Gait: A Model-based Evaluation" (2017). Biomedical Engineering Faculty Research and Publications. 473.
https://epublications.marquette.edu/bioengin_fac/473
Comments
NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Medical Engineering & Physics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Medical Engineering & Physics, Vol. 43 (May 2017): 118-123. DOI. © 2017 Elsevier. Used with permission.