Smartphone-Based Markerless Motion Capture for Orthopaedic Clinical Use
NCT ID: NCT05370534
Last Updated: 2023-12-26
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
WITHDRAWN
OBSERVATIONAL
2023-12-01
2023-12-18
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Aim 2 will then compare the app-based MCA to traditional gold standard MCA in healthy volunteers. A dedicated human biomechanics lab with capability for MCA with reflective markers will be utilized to test both MCA methods. Patients will perform a box jump and normal walking gait, and the measurements from both the standard marker-based MCA system and the smartphone markerless MCA system will be statistically compared.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Study Population
The investigators anticipate validating two specific actions: a box jump and walking gait. Both will be captured in two planes, coronal and sagittal. Healthy patients without musculoskeletal complaints will be voluntarily enrolled to undergo motion capture with both methods, completed during the same visit to the UAMS Human Biomechanics Laboratory.
Each patient will perform a box jump and walking gait using each of the two modalities. We anticipate 4 hrs will be required for each patient: 1 hr for setup before the patient arrives, 1 hr for testing, and 2 hrs for data cleaning and initial processing. This work will be performed at the UAMS Human Biomechanics Laboratory (off campus on Aldersgate Road), which is equipped for this type of analysis.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* No known spinal pathology
* No previous lower extremity surgery
* No significant cardiac history
Exclusion Criteria
* Known spinal pathology
* Previous lower extremity surgery
* Significant cardiac history
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
NIH
University of Arkansas
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
David B Bumpass, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Arkansas
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Little Rock, Arkansas, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Thewlis D, Waters A, Solomon LB, Perilli E. Investigating in vivo knee volumetric bone mineral density and walking gait mechanics in healthy people. Bone. 2021 Feb;143:115662. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115662. Epub 2020 Sep 25.
Kuchen DB, Eichelberger P, Baur H, Rutz E. Long-term follow-up after patellar tendon shortening for flexed knee gait in bilateral spastic cerebral palsy. Gait Posture. 2020 Sep;81:85-90. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.07.003. Epub 2020 Jul 6.
Kuai S, Guan X, Liu W, Ji R, Xiong J, Wang D, Zhou W. Prediction of the Spinal Musculoskeletal Loadings during Level Walking and Stair Climbing after Two Types of Simulated Interventions in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation. J Healthc Eng. 2019 Dec 17;2019:6406813. doi: 10.1155/2019/6406813. eCollection 2019.
Ueno R, Navacchia A, Schilaty ND, Myer GD, Hewett TE, Bates NA. Anterior Cruciate Ligament Loading Increases With Pivot-Shift Mechanism During Asymmetrical Drop Vertical Jump in Female Athletes. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021 Mar 9;9(3):2325967121989095. doi: 10.1177/2325967121989095. eCollection 2021 Mar.
Camp CL, Loushin S, Nezlek S, Fiegen AP, Christoffer D, Kaufman K. Are Wearable Sensors Valid and Reliable for Studying the Baseball Pitching Motion? An Independent Comparison With Marker-Based Motion Capture. Am J Sports Med. 2021 Sep;49(11):3094-3101. doi: 10.1177/03635465211029017. Epub 2021 Aug 2.
Di Paolo S, Zaffagnini S, Tosarelli F, Aggio F, Bragonzoni L, Grassi A, Della Villa F. A 2D qualitative movement assessment of a deceleration task detects football players with high knee joint loading. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021 Dec;29(12):4032-4040. doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06709-2. Epub 2021 Sep 4.
Tsakanikas VD, Gatsios D, Dimopoulos D, Pardalis A, Pavlou M, Liston MB, Fotiadis DI. Evaluating the Performance of Balance Physiotherapy Exercises Using a Sensory Platform: The Basis for a Persuasive Balance Rehabilitation Virtual Coaching System. Front Digit Health. 2020 Nov 27;2:545885. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2020.545885. eCollection 2020.
Paloschi D, Bravi M, Schena E, Miccinilli S, Morrone M, Sterzi S, Saccomandi P, Massaroni C. Validation and Assessment of a Posture Measurement System with Magneto-Inertial Measurement Units. Sensors (Basel). 2021 Oct 3;21(19):6610. doi: 10.3390/s21196610.
Tamura H, Tanaka R, Kawanishi H. Reliability of a markerless motion capture system to measure the trunk, hip and knee angle during walking on a flatland and a treadmill. J Biomech. 2020 Aug 26;109:109929. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.109929. Epub 2020 Jul 1.
Wochatz M, Tilgner N, Mueller S, Rabe S, Eichler S, John M, Voller H, Mayer F. Reliability and validity of the Kinect V2 for the assessment of lower extremity rehabilitation exercises. Gait Posture. 2019 May;70:330-335. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.03.020. Epub 2019 Mar 26.
Scano A, Chiavenna A, Malosio M, Molinari Tosatti L, Molteni F. Kinect V2 implementation and testing of the reaching performance scale for motor evaluation of patients with neurological impairment. Med Eng Phys. 2018 Jun;56:54-58. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2018.04.005. Epub 2018 Apr 20.
Schuirmann DJ. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1987 Dec;15(6):657-80. doi: 10.1007/BF01068419.
Walker E, Nowacki AS. Understanding equivalence and noninferiority testing. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Feb;26(2):192-6. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1513-8. Epub 2010 Sep 21.
McGinley JL, Baker R, Wolfe R, Morris ME. The reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: a systematic review. Gait Posture. 2009 Apr;29(3):360-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.09.003. Epub 2008 Nov 13.
Tanaka R, Takimoto H, Yamasaki T, Higashi A. Validity of time series kinematical data as measured by a markerless motion capture system on a flatland for gait assessment. J Biomech. 2018 Apr 11;71:281-285. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.01.035. Epub 2018 Feb 8.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
GM125503
Identifier Type: OTHER_GRANT
Identifier Source: secondary_id
274321
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id