Abstract
The purpose of this study was to validate a new geometric solids model, developed to address the lack of female-specific models for body segment inertial parameter estimation. A second aim was to determine the effect of reducing the number of geometric solids used to model the limb segments on model accuracy. The full model comprised 56 geometric solids, the reduced model comprised 31, and the basic model comprised 16. Predicted whole-body inertial parameters were compared with direct measurements (reaction board, scales), and predicted segmental parameters with those estimated from whole-body dual x-ray absorptiometry scans for 28 females. The percentage root mean square error (%RMSE) for whole-body volume was <2.5% for all models and 1.9% for the full model. The %RMSE for whole-body center of mass location was <3.2% for all models. The %RMSE whole-body mass was <3.3% for the full model. The RMSE for segment masses was <0.5kg (<0.5%) for all segments; Bland-Altman analysis showed the full and reduced models could adequately model thigh, forearm, foot, and hand segments, but the full model was required for the trunk segment. The proposed model was able to accurately predict body segment inertial parameters for females; more geometric solids are required to more accurately model the trunk.
Highlights
In order to study, analyze, or optimize human movement, the mass, the center of mass location, and the body segment moments of inertia must be known
Geometric models are a cost-effective way of estimating subject-specific body segment inertial parameters (BSIPs), a key problem is that no female-specific geometric models for estimating BSIPs have been validated, despite significant differences in the shapes of segments between males and females.[3]
The primary hypothesis is that trunk BSIPs predicted by a geometric solid model with an increased number of trunk measurements would improve the accuracy of female trunk masses predicted using geometric modeling compared with those determined using dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA)
Summary
The purpose of this study was to validate a geometric solid model defined for female subjects by comparing model predicted data with direct whole-body measurements and DXAderived segmental mass data. Note that Yeadon’s model was only validated using direct whole-body measures.[9] The primary hypothesis is that trunk BSIPs predicted by a geometric solid model with an increased number of trunk measurements would improve the accuracy of female trunk masses predicted using geometric modeling compared with those determined using DXA. The secondary aim of this study was to determine whether a reduced number of limb measurements can be taken while preserving the accuracy of BSIPs for the whole body and model segments using a reduced number of geometric solids
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
