Journal
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN MOVEMENT
Volume 47, Issue -, Pages -Publisher
UNIV EXTREMADURA, FAC CIENCIAS DEPORTE
DOI: 10.21134/eurjhm.2021.47.10
Keywords
Dynamic knee valgus; injury; screening; motion analysis
Categories
Funding
- Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad from Spain [FPI BES-2015-07200]
- Seneca Foundation (postdoctoral fellowships funded by the regional sub program focuses on the postdoctoral development) from Spain [20366/PD/17]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This study compared the validity of knee alignment and motion range measurements in frontal and sagittal planes between 2D video analysis and 3D motion analysis, finding high agreement for knee medial displacement and knee flexion range of motion in bilateral drop vertical jumps.
Three-dimensional (3D) motion capture systems have been used to identify athletes in high risk of injury, but due to their cost, lack of portability and qualified technicians, an alternative is needed, such as two-dimensional (2D) systems. The purpose of this study was to examine the criterion-related validity of three measures of frontal plane knee alignment (frontal plane projection angle [FPPA], knee-to-ankle separation ratio [KASR] and knee medial displacement [KMD]) and three sagittal plane measures (hip, knee and ankle flexion ranges of motion [RoMs]), recorded simultaneously using a 2D video analysis procedure and a 3D motion analysis system. Twenty-nine male futsal players had frontal and sagittal plane kinematics assessed while performing bilateral drop vertical jumps (DVJ). The criterion-related validity of the frontal and sagittal plane kinematic measures obtained using the 2D video analysis procedure and 3D motion system was determined through the estimation equation, typical error of the estimate (TEEsr) and validity correlation (r). Kappa correlations were also calculated to determine the agreement between the 2D and 3D kinematic approaches. The results showed poor validity for the FPPA measure (standardized TEEsr = 1.57 [large], r = 0.54) and ankle flexion RoM (standardized TEEsr = 2.48 [large], r = 0.37) and moderate validity for KASR (standardized TEEsr = 0.88 [moderate], r = 0.77), KMD (standardized TEEsr = 0.44 [small], r = 0.91), hip flexion RoM (standardized TEEsr = 0.67 [moderate], r = 0.83) and knee flexion RoM (standardized TEEsr = 0.58 [small], r = 0.87) measures. However, only the KMD and knee flexion RoM measures showed high levels of agreement (kappa > 0.7). Therefore, the KMD and knee flexion RoM measures calculated during a bilateral DVJ and using a 2D video analysis procedure might be considered as valid and feasible alternatives to their respective 3D criterion to quantify knee kinematics and to detect futsal players who demonstrated aberrant movement patterns in the frontal and sagittal planes, respectively.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available