Markerless motion capture systems as training device in neurological rehabilitation: a systematic review of their use, application, target population and efficacy.
Els Knippenberg, Jonas Verbrugghe, Ilse Lamers and 3 others
PMID 28646914WHAT IT FOUND
Most markerless motion capture rehab studies used Kinect in stroke, training upper or lower limbs.
Patients improved on balance or arm tests, but few trials, low quality and varied protocols mean efficacy is not proven.
Key findings
01Eighteen studies were analysed, and most used Microsoft Kinect.
02Upper and lower limb training with markerless motion capture produced within-group improvements on motor and balance tests.
03An upper-limb study combined markerless motion capture with conventional therapy, so the contribution of either component cannot be separated.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
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 included studies had low methodological quality, with a mean score of 8.06 ± 3.67 out of 17. Only six studies reached the quality cut-off used for efficacy, and sample sizes ranged from one to 35 participants. The review could not perform a meta-analysis, so conclusions about efficacy are cautious. Training duration, intensity, content and outcome measures varied widely across studies. Most follow-up was short-term, and only two studies had long-term follow-up. The search may have missed relevant studies because terms such as Kinect and rehabilitation were used. Microsoft Kinect has limited fine movement capture and shoulder biomechanical accuracy, and game scores may not reflect functional improvement.
Declared interests
The paper reports funding by Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that markerless motion capture training is proven effective for neurological rehabilitation. The review found within-group improvements, but the studies were small and varied, no meta-analysis could be performed, and home versus centre training did not show a clear difference.