TY - JOUR
T1 - Healthcare applications of single camera markerless motion capture
T2 - a scoping review
AU - Scott, Bradley
AU - Scott, Bradley
AU - Seyres, Martin
AU - Philp, Fraser
AU - Chadwick, Edward K
AU - Blana, Dimitra
N1 - Funding
This work was funded by a University of Aberdeen Elphinstone PhD scholarship. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
PY - 2022/5/26
Y1 - 2022/5/26
N2 - Background: Single camera markerless motion capture has the potential to facilitate at home movement assessment due to the ease of setup, portability, and affordable cost of the technology. However, it is not clear what the current healthcare applications of single camera markerless motion capture are and what information is being collected that may be used to inform clinical decision making. This review aims to map the available literature to highlight potential use cases and identify the limitations of the technology for clinicians and researchers interested in the collection of movement data.Survey Methodology: Studies were collected up to 14 January 2022 using Pubmed, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus using a systematic search. Data recorded included the description of the markerless system, clinical outcome measures, and biomechanical data mapped to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Framework (ICF). Studies were grouped by patient population.Results: A total of 50 studies were included for data collection. Use cases for single camera markerless motion capture technology were identified for Neurological Injury in Children and Adults; Hereditary/Genetic Neuromuscular Disorders; Frailty; and Orthopaedic or Musculoskeletal groups. Single camera markerless systems were found to perform well in studies involving single plane measurements, such as in the analysis of infant general movements or spatiotemporal parameters of gait, when evaluated against 3D marker-based systems and a variety of clinical outcome measures. However, they were less capable than marker-based systems in studies requiring the tracking of detailed 3D kinematics or fine movements such as finger tracking.Conclusions: Single camera markerless motion capture offers great potential for extending the scope of movement analysis outside of laboratory settings in a practical way, but currently suffers from a lack of accuracy where detailed 3D kinematics are required for clinical decision making. Future work should therefore focus on improving tracking accuracy of movements that are out of plane relative to the camera orientation or affected by occlusion, such as supination and pronation of the forearm.
AB - Background: Single camera markerless motion capture has the potential to facilitate at home movement assessment due to the ease of setup, portability, and affordable cost of the technology. However, it is not clear what the current healthcare applications of single camera markerless motion capture are and what information is being collected that may be used to inform clinical decision making. This review aims to map the available literature to highlight potential use cases and identify the limitations of the technology for clinicians and researchers interested in the collection of movement data.Survey Methodology: Studies were collected up to 14 January 2022 using Pubmed, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus using a systematic search. Data recorded included the description of the markerless system, clinical outcome measures, and biomechanical data mapped to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Framework (ICF). Studies were grouped by patient population.Results: A total of 50 studies were included for data collection. Use cases for single camera markerless motion capture technology were identified for Neurological Injury in Children and Adults; Hereditary/Genetic Neuromuscular Disorders; Frailty; and Orthopaedic or Musculoskeletal groups. Single camera markerless systems were found to perform well in studies involving single plane measurements, such as in the analysis of infant general movements or spatiotemporal parameters of gait, when evaluated against 3D marker-based systems and a variety of clinical outcome measures. However, they were less capable than marker-based systems in studies requiring the tracking of detailed 3D kinematics or fine movements such as finger tracking.Conclusions: Single camera markerless motion capture offers great potential for extending the scope of movement analysis outside of laboratory settings in a practical way, but currently suffers from a lack of accuracy where detailed 3D kinematics are required for clinical decision making. Future work should therefore focus on improving tracking accuracy of movements that are out of plane relative to the camera orientation or affected by occlusion, such as supination and pronation of the forearm.
KW - Markerless motion capture
KW - Markerless
KW - Single camera markerless motion capture
KW - Scoping review
KW - Single camera human motion analysis
KW - Single camera movement analysis of humans
KW - Clinical motion capture
KW - Neurological injuries
KW - Telerehabilitation
KW - Musculoskeletal
U2 - 10.7717/peerj.13517
DO - 10.7717/peerj.13517
M3 - Article
C2 - 35642200
VL - 10
JO - PeerJ
JF - PeerJ
SN - 2167-8359
M1 - e13517
ER -