The influence of tracking marker locations on three-dimensional wrist kinematics

Personal belief on elastic tape and tape tension affect perceived performance, but not muscle activity and endurance

BACKGROUND

Previous studies reported inconsistent outcomes on elastic taping for three potential reasons: 1) poor control of placebo effect; 2) no consensus regarding the optimal tape tension; and 3) lack of investigation on muscle endurance, as the proposed tape recoiling force may not promote peak force generation but exert a consistently low force and improve submaximal contraction.

PURPOSE

This study compared the effects of elastic tape and its tension on muscle activity and endurance in people with extremely positive and negative personal belief on elastic tape.

METHODS

Using a validated instrument, we identified 20 participants with extremely positive personal belief on elastic tape (+ belief), and 20 with extremely negative personal belief (- belief). They performed wrist isometric endurance tests under three taping conditions (i.e. no tape, 50%, and 100% tension). We measured isometric wrist extensor muscle endurance, electromyography muscle activity, and self-perceived performance for each condition.

RESULTS

The differences between the two groups in isometric muscle endurance (p = .85) and muscle activity (p = .53) were not statistically significant, regardless of tape conditions. However, participants with + belief reported better perceived performance than those with - belief (p < .001, partial eta squared = 0.70). Specifically, 100% tape tension yielded stronger self-perceived performance than 50% tension (Cohen's d = 0.91) and no tape (Cohen's d = 1.86). On the other hand, participants with - belief perceived similar performance across tape tensions (p = .55).

CONCLUSION

Elastic tape does not modulate muscle activity and enhance muscle endurance. People with a strong positive personal belief on elastic tape may perceive a better performance with a greater tape tension.

Development and Evaluation of a Hybrid Measurement System to Determine the Kinematics of the Wrist

Optical Motion Capture Systems (OMCSs) are considered the gold standard for kinematic measurement of human movements. However, in situations such as measuring wrist kinematics during a hairdressing activity, markers can be obscured, resulting in a loss of data. Other measurement methods based on non-optical data can be considered, such as magneto-inertial measurement units (MIMUs). Their accuracy is generally lower than that of an OMCS. In this context, it may be worth considering a hybrid system [MIMU + OMCS] to take advantage of OMCS accuracy while limiting occultation problems. The aim of this work was (1) to propose a methodology for coupling a low-cost MIMU (BNO055) to an OMCS in order to evaluate wrist kinematics, and then (2) to evaluate the accuracy of this hybrid system [MIMU + OMCS] during a simple hairdressing gesture. During hair cutting gestures, the root mean square error compared with the OMCS was 4.53° (1.45°) for flexion/extension, 5.07° (1.30°) for adduction/abduction, and 3.65° (1.19°) for pronation/supination. During combing gestures, they were significantly higher, but remained below 10°. In conclusion, this system allows for maintaining wrist kinematics in case of the loss of hand markers while preserving an acceptable level of precision (<10°) for ergonomic measurement or entertainment purposes.

In Vivo Measurement of Wrist Movements during the Dart-Throwing Motion Using Inertial Measurement Units

BACKGROUND

This study investigates the dart-throwing motion (DTM) by comparing an inertial measurement unit-based system previously validated for basic motion tasks with an optoelectronic motion capture system. The DTM is interesting as wrist movement during many activities of daily living occur in this movement plane, but the complex movement is difficult to assess clinically.

METHODS

Ten healthy subjects were recorded while performing the DTM with their right wrist using inertial sensors and skin markers. Maximum range of motion obtained by the different systems and the mean absolute difference were calculated.

RESULTS

In the flexion-extension plane, both systems calculated a range of motion of 100° with mean absolute differences of 8°, while in the radial-ulnar deviation plane, a mean absolute difference of 17° and range of motion values of 48° for the optoelectronic system and 59° for the inertial measurement units were found.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the challenge of comparing results of different kinematic motion capture systems for complex movements while also highlighting inertial measurement units as promising for future clinical application in dynamic and coupled wrist movements. Possible sources of error and solutions are discussed.