Can the evaluation of marker placement confidence be used as an indicator of gait kinematic variability?
Mickael Fonseca, Xavier Gasparutto, Carcreff Lena and 4 others
PMID 37496701WHAT IT FOUND
A marker placement confidence questionnaire was reliable and related to some marker precision, but it did not predict how much gait angles varied between repeat sessions.
Key findings
01The confidence questionnaire was reliable: in protocol A it was high for pelvic markers and moderate for the remaining markers, and in protocol B it was high for all markers.
02Confidence scores did not correlate well with inter-session gait kinematic variability in protocol A.
03Confidence scores were linked to BMI and to actual marker placement precision for some marker groups.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study tested a custom-made questionnaire and the Conventional Gait Model, so it does not show how other questionnaires or models would behave. Protocol B used only 8 asymptomatic adults, so its findings about evaluator experience and marker precision may not apply to patients. The main indicator question was not supported: confidence scores did not correlate well with inter-session kinematic variability, even though some confidence scores correlated with marker precision. Marker misplacement effects are complex, and one misplaced marker can be enhanced or mitigated by another, so confidence in a single marker or marker group may not predict overall kinematic variability.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that an evaluator's confidence in marker placement predicts how variable gait angles will be. The study found low correlation between confidence scores and inter-session kinematic variability, and none of the related parameters showed a good correlation.