Assessment of intersegmental coordination of rats during walking at different speeds – Application of continuous relative phase

2018 ◽  
Vol 73 ◽  
pp. 168-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Raffalt ◽  
Louise R. Nielsen ◽  
Stefan Madsen ◽  
Laurits Munk Højberg ◽  
Jessica Pingel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Relative Phase ◽  
Intersegmental Coordination ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase

Stroke-affected upper extremity movement assessment via continuous relative phase analysis

Measurement ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 84-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina Daunoravičienė ◽  
Jurgita Žižienė ◽  
Jolanta Pauk ◽  
Adam Idzkowski ◽  
Inga Raudonytė ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Phase Analysis ◽  
Relative Phase ◽  
Movement Assessment ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase ◽  
Upper Extremity Movement

Variability in kinematic coupling assessed by vector coding and continuous relative phase

2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (13) ◽  
pp. 2554-2560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross H. Miller ◽  
Ryan Chang ◽  
Jennifer L. Baird ◽  
Richard E.A. Van Emmerik ◽  
Joseph Hamill
Keyword(s):  
Relative Phase ◽  
Vector Coding ◽  
Kinematic Coupling ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase

Comparison of Lumbopelvic Coordination between Trunk Flexion and Extension

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 937-941
Author(s):  
Jie Zhou ◽  
Xiaopeng Ning
Keyword(s):  
Relative Phase ◽  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
Influential Factor ◽  
Coordination Pattern ◽  
Trunk Flexion ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase ◽  
Phase Variability ◽  
Coordination Patterns ◽  
Flexion And Extension

Lumbopelvic coordination describes the relative contributions of lumbar and pelvis to the total trunk flexion/extension motion, which has been identified as a major influential factor to spinal loading. The current study investigated the differences in lumbopelvic coordination between trunk flexion and extension. Thirteen subjects performed pace-controlled trunk flexion/extension motions in the sagittal plane while lumbopelvic continuous relative phase and phase variability were quantified. The results demonstrated that compared with trunk extension, lumbopelvic continuous relative phase and phase variability were 28% and 117% greater in trunk flexion motion, respectively, which indicated a more anti-phase and unstable coordination pattern. Quantifying these coordination patterns helps identifying abnormal patterns and serves as normative benchmarks during low back pain rehabilitation.

scholarly journals PORTRAIT AND HILBERT TRANSFORM METHODS FOR EVALUATING CONTINUOUS RELATIVE PHASE BETWEEN LOWER-LIMB JOINTS IN THE ELDERLY DURING WALKING

2021 ◽  
pp. 2140038
Author(s):  
HYUK-JAE CHOI ◽  
GYOOSUK KIM ◽  
CHANG-YONG KO
Keyword(s):  
Angular Velocity ◽  
Hilbert Transform ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Cross Correlation ◽  
Relative Phase ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Transform Method ◽  
Transform Methods ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase ◽  
The Hilbert Transform

In order to calculate the continuous relative phase (CRP) between joints, the portrait method based on the joint angle and angular velocity and the Hilbert transform method based on the analytical signal have been widely used. However, there are few comparisons of these methods. Therefore, the aim of this study is to quantitatively compare these methods by calculating the CRP in the lower-limb joints of the elderly during level free walking. Eighteen elderly female adults ([Formula: see text] year-old, [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]cm, [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]kg) wearing a Helen Hayes full-body marker set walked 10[Formula: see text]m on level ground at a self-selected velocity. The angles of the hip, knee, and ankle were measured. To calculate the CRP using the portrait method, the angular velocities were measured. Then, the phases between the angle and the angular velocity were calculated. To calculate the CRP using the Hilbert transform method, analytical signals were acquired. Then, the phases between the real and imaginary parts were calculated. A CRP was calculated as the difference between the phase in the proximal joint and the phase in the distal joint. To evaluate the similarity in the shape between the portrait and Hilbert transform methods, the cross-correlation was calculated. Bland–Altman plot analyses were performed to assess the agreement between these methods. For the root mean squares (RMSs) and standard deviations (SDs), a paired [Formula: see text]-test and the Pearson correlation between methods were evaluated. There were similarities in the in-phase or out-of-phase features and in the RMS and SD between the methods. Additionally, a higher cross-correlation and agreement between them were found. These results indicated the similarity between the portrait and Hilbert transform methods for the calculation of the CRP. Therefore, either method can be used to evaluate joint coordination.

Limitations in the use and interpretation of continuous relative phase

2003 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian T. Peters ◽  
Jeffrey M. Haddad ◽  
Bryan C. Heiderscheit ◽  
Richard E.A. Van Emmerik ◽  
Joseph Hamill
Keyword(s):  
Relative Phase ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase

scholarly journals Order error in the calculation of continuous relative phase

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sina Mehdizadeh ◽  
Paul Glazier
Keyword(s):  
Hilbert Transform ◽  
Degrees Of Freedom ◽  
Phase Plane ◽  
Relative Phase ◽  
Human Movement ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Order Error ◽  
Movement Data ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase ◽  
The Hilbert Transform

The aims of this study were to demonstrate “order error” in the calculation of continuous relative phase (CRP) and to suggest two alternative methods—(i) constructing phase-plane portraits by plotting position over velocity; and (ii), the Hilbert transform—to rectify it. Order error is the change of CRP order between two degrees of freedom (e.g., body segments) when using the conventional method of constructing phase-plane portraits (i.e., velocity over position). Both sinusoidal and non-sinusoidal simulated signals as well as signals from human movement kinematics were used to investigate order error and the performance of the two alternative methods. Both methods have been shown to lead to correct results for simulated sinusoidal and non-sinusoidal signals. For human movement data, however, the Hilbert transform is superior for calculating CRP.

scholarly journals Effects of knee sleeves on coordination of lower-limb segments in healthy adults during level walking and one-leg hopping

PeerJ ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. e3340
Author(s):  
Chang-Yong Ko ◽  
Yunhee Chang ◽  
Bora Jeong ◽  
Sungjae Kang ◽  
Jeicheong Ryu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Limb ◽  
Stance Phase ◽  
Relative Phase ◽  
Distal Segment ◽  
Physical Activities ◽  
Healthy Male ◽  
Level Walking ◽  
Walking Velocity ◽  
Continuous Relative Phase ◽  
Analysis System

The evaluation of multisegment coordination is important in gaining a better understanding of the gait and physical activities in humans. Therefore, this study aims to verify whether the use of knee sleeves affects the coordination of lower-limb segments during level walking and one-leg hopping. Eleven healthy male adults participated in this study. They were asked to walk 10 m on a level ground and perform one-leg hops with and without a knee sleeve. The segment angles and the response velocities of the thigh, shank, and foot were measured and calculated by using a motion analysis system. The phases between the segment angle and the velocity were then calculated. Moreover, the continuous relative phase (CRP) was calculated as the phase of the distal segment subtracted from the phase of the proximal segment and denoted as CRPTS (thigh–shank), CRPSF (shank–foot), and CRPTF (thigh–foot). The root mean square (RMS) values were used to evaluate the in-phase or out-of-phase states, while the standard deviation (SD) values were utilized to evaluate the variability in the stance and swing phases during level walking and in the preflight, flight, and landing phases during one-leg hopping. The walking velocity and the flight time improved when the knee sleeve was worn (p < 0.05). The segment angles of the thigh and shank also changed when the knee sleeve was worn during level walking and one-leg hopping. The RMS values of CRPTS and CRPSF in the stance phase and the RMS values of CRPSF in the preflight and landing phases changed (p < 0.05 in all cases). Moreover, the SD values of CRPTS in the landing phase and the SD values of CRPSF in the preflight and landing phases increased (p < 0.05 in all cases). These results indicated that wearing a knee sleeve caused changes in segment kinematics and coordination.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document