Respiratory 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

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

Massaroni C;Schena E;Silvestri S
2018-01-01

Abstract

Respiratory 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
Thoraco abdominal motion; respiratory assessment; Breathing volume measurements
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12610/4405
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact