Comparison of marker models for the analysis of the volume variation and thoracoabdominal motion pattern in untrained and trained participants

dc.contributor.authorMassaroni, Carlo
dc.contributor.authorSilvatti, Amanda Piaia
dc.contributor.authorLevai, Irisz Karolina
dc.contributor.authorDickinson, John
dc.contributor.authorWinter, Samantha
dc.contributor.authorSchena, Emiliano
dc.contributor.authorSilvestri, Sergio
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-23T13:55:30Z
dc.date.available2018-08-23T13:55:30Z
dc.date.issued2018-06-08
dc.description.abstractRespiratory assessment and the biomechanical analysis of chest and abdomen motion during breathing can be carried out using motion capture systems. An advantage of this methodology is that it allows analysis of compartmental breathing volumes, thoraco-abdominal patterns, percentage contribution of each compartment and the coordination between compartments. In the literature, mainly, two marker models are reported, a full marker model of 89 markers placed on the trunk and a reduced marker model with 32 markers. However, in practice, positioning and post-process a large number of markers on the trunk can be time-consuming. In this study, the full marker model was compared against the one that uses a reduced number of markers, in order to evaluate (i) their capability to obtain respiratory parameters (breath-by-breath tidal volumes) and thoracoabdominal motion pattern (compartmental percentage contributions, and coordination between compartments) during quiet breathing, and (ii) their response in different groups such as trained and untrained, male and female. Although tests revealed strong correlations of the tidal volume values in all the groups (R2 > 0.93), the reduced model underestimated the trunk volume compared with the 89 marker model. The highest underestimation was found in trained males (bias of 0.43 L). The three-way ANOVA test showed that the model did not influence the evaluation of compartmental contributions and the 32 marker model was adequate to distinguish thoracoabdominal breathing pattern in the studied groups. Our findings showed that the reduced marker model could be used to analyse the thoracoabdominal motion in both trained and untrained populations but performs poorly in estimating tidal volume.en
dc.formatpdfpt-BR
dc.identifier.issn0021-9290
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.05.036
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/21390
dc.language.isoengpt-BR
dc.publisherJournal of Biomechanicspt-BR
dc.relation.ispartofseriesvolume 76, páginas 247–252, julho 2018pt-BR
dc.rightsElsevier Ltd.pt-BR
dc.subjectThoraco abdominal motionpt-BR
dc.subjectBreathingpt-BR
dc.subjectRespiratory assessmentpt-BR
dc.subjectVolumept-BR
dc.subjectCoordinationpt-BR
dc.titleComparison of marker models for the analysis of the volume variation and thoracoabdominal motion pattern in untrained and trained participantsen
dc.typeArtigopt-BR

Arquivos

Pacote original

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Nenhuma Miniatura Disponível
Nome:
artigo.pdf
Tamanho:
490.44 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descrição:
texto completo

Licença do pacote

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Nenhuma Miniatura Disponível
Nome:
license.txt
Tamanho:
1.71 KB
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descrição:

Coleções