Upright static pelvic posture as rotations and translations in 3-dimensional from three 2-dimensional digital images: validation of a computerized analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy in measuring the pelvic orientations of a phantom model using the PosturePrint method. METHODS: In the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières biomechanics laboratory, Trois-Rivières, Quebec, Canada, a mannequin was fixed on a rotating platform. For a set of 3 photographs (left lateral, anterior to posterior, right lateral) of each position, the mannequin pelvis was placed in 68 different postures on a stand, 61 cm from a wall, in front of a digital camera. The camera was at 83.8 cm in height and at 3.35 m from a calibrated wall grid. Mannequin postures were in 5 degrees of freedom: lateral translation (Tx), lateral flexion (Rz), axial rotation (Ry), flexion-extension (Rx), and anterior-posterior translation (Tz). Average errors were the differences of the positioned postures to the PosturePrint computed values. RESULTS: Mean and SD of computational errors for rotation displacements were Rx = 0.5 degrees +/- 0.8 degrees , Ry = 1.3 degrees +/- 0.8 degrees , and Rz = 0.5 degrees +/- 0.3 degrees , and for translation, Tz = 1.2 +/- 0.6 mm and Tx = 0.9 +/- 0.5 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The PosturePrint system allowed for accurate postural measurement of rotations and translations of a mannequin pelvis. The next step in evaluation of this product would be a reliability study on human subjects.

Three dimensional evaluation of posture in standing with the PosturePrint: an intra- and inter-examiner reliability study.

BACKGROUND: Few digitizers can measure the complexity of upright human postural displacements in six degrees of freedom of the head, rib cage, and pelvis. METHODS: In a University laboratory, three examiners performed delayed repeated postural measurements on forty subjects over two days. Three digital photographs (left lateral, AP, right lateral) of each of 40 volunteer participants were obtained, twice, by three examiners. Examiners placed 13 markers on the subjects before photography and chose 16 points on the photographic images. Using the PosturePrint internet computer system, head, rib cage, and pelvic postures were calculated as rotations (Rx, Ry, Rz) in degrees and translations (Tx, Tz) in millimeters. For reliability, two different types (liberal = ICC(3,1) & conservative = ICC(2,1)) of inter- and intra-examiner correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. Standard error of measurements (SEM) and mean absolute differences within and between observers' measurements were also determined. RESULTS: All of the "liberal" ICCs were in the excellent range (> 0.84). For the more "conservative" type ICCs, four Inter-examiner ICCs were in the interval (0.5-0.6), 10 ICCs were in the interval (0.61-0.74), and the remainder were greater than 0.75. SEMs were 2.7 degrees or less for all rotations and 5.9 mm or less for all translations. Mean absolute differences within examiners and between examiners were 3.5 degrees or less for all rotations and 8.4 mm or less for all translations. CONCLUSION: For the PosturePrint system, the combined inter-examiner and intra-examiner correlation coefficients were in the good (14/44) and excellent (30/44) ranges. SEMs and mean absolute differences within and between examiners' measurements were small. Thus, this posture digitizer is reliable for clinical use.

Validity of a computer postural analysis to estimate 3-dimensional rotations and translations of the head from three 2-dimensional digital images.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to describe and evaluate the validity/accuracy of the computerized system PosturePrint for measuring head posture. METHODS: Computer analysis was compared with 125 measured positions of a mannequin head in 5 degrees of freedom. For each mannequin position, 3 digital photographs were obtained (left lateral, anteroposterior, and right lateral) and were processed through the PosturePrint computer system. For the head analysis, a headgear with 3 reflective markers was placed on a subject; and there were additional click-on markers at the ear tragus, upper lip, acromioclavicular joints, and episternal notch. Head postures were calculated as lateral translation (T(x)), lateral flexion (R(z)), axial rotation (R(y)), flexion-extension (R(x)), and anterior-posterior translation (T(z)). For an error analysis, PosturePrint algorithm calculations were compared with the true mannequin head positions. Furthermore, average head posture was determined in student volunteers (n = 40). RESULTS: Mean computational errors were R(x) = 1.3 degrees (SD 0.6 degrees) and T(z) = 1.1 mm (SD 0.5 mm) for sagittal displacements and R(y) = 1.1 degrees (SD 0.7 degrees), R(z) = 0.6 degrees (SD 0.4 degrees), and T(x) = 1.1 mm (SD 0.5 mm) for frontal view displacements. For the normal group, mean head displacements were 1.1 degrees or less for all rotations and 1 mm or less for lateral translations (T(x)); and forward head posture (T(z)) averaged 3 cm. CONCLUSION: From the mannequin positions, small mean errors indicate that the PosturePrint system is accurate. In the future, statistical research determining the correlation between head displacements, neck pain, function, and health status should be performed.

Validation of a computer analysis to determine 3-D rotations and translations of the rib cage in upright posture from three 2-D digital images.

Since thoracic cage posture affects lumbar spine coupling and loads on the spinal tissues and extremities, a scientific analysis of upright posture is needed. Common posture analyzers measure human posture as displacements from a plumb line, while the PosturePrint claims to measure head, rib cage, and pelvic postures as rotations and translations. In this study, it was decided to evaluate the validity of the PosturePrint Internet computer system's analysis of thoracic cage postures. In a university biomechanics laboratory, photographs of a mannequin thoracic cage were obtained in different postures on a stand in front of a digital camera. For each mannequin posture, three photographs were obtained (left lateral, right lateral, and AP). The mannequin thoracic cage was placed in 68 different single and combined postures (requiring 204 photographs) in five degrees of freedom: lateral translation (Tx), lateral flexion (Rz), axial rotation (Ry), flexion-extension (Rx), and anterior-posterior translation (Tz). The PosturePrint system requires 13 reflective markers to be placed on the subject (mannequin) during photography and 16 additional "click-on" markers via computer mouse before a set of three photographs is analyzed by the PosturePrint computer system over the Internet. Errors were the differences between the positioned mannequin and the calculated positions from the computer system. Average absolute value errors were obtained by comparing the exact inputted posture to the PosturePrint computed values. Mean and standard deviation of computational errors for sagittal displacements of the thoracic cage were Rx=0.3+/-0.1 degrees , Tz=1.6+/-0.7 mm, and for frontal view displacements were Ry=1.2+/-1.0 degrees , Rz=0.6+/-0.4 degrees , and Tx=1.5+/-0.6 mm. The PosturePrint system is sufficiently accurate in measuring thoracic cage postures in five degrees of freedom on a mannequin indicating the need for a further study on human subjects.