A standardised template for reporting lower limb kinematic waveform movement compensations from a sensor-based portable clinical movement analysis toolkit

K Button; M Felemban; J L Davies; K Nicholas; J Parry-Williams; Q Muaidi; M Al-Amri

doi:10.1016/j.ipemt.2021.100001

A standardised template for reporting lower limb kinematic waveform movement compensations from a sensor-based portable clinical movement analysis toolkit

IPEM Transl. 2022 Apr:1:None. doi: 10.1016/j.ipemt.2021.100001.

Authors

K Button^{1

2

3}, M Felemban¹, J L Davies^{1

2}, K Nicholas^{1

3}, J Parry-Williams³, Q Muaidi⁴, M Al-Amri^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
² Biomechanics and Bioengineering Versus Arthritis Centre, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
³ Physiotherapy Department, Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, UK.
⁴ Physical Therapy Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Saudi Arabia.

Abstract

Objectives: To develop a standardised template to support physiotherapist reporting of lower limb kinematic waveform data.

Design: Within and between user agreement identification of movement compensation strategies.

Setting: University Health Board Physiotherapy Department.

Participants: Fourteen individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction performed overground gait, double-leg squat, and stair ascent wearing body-worn sensors. Six users viewed 252 kinematic waveforms of hip, knee and ankle joint angles in the sagittal and frontal planes.

Main outcome measures: Between and within-user observed agreement and themes from movement analysis reports.

Results: Between-user observed agreement for presence of a movement compensation was 0.6-0.9 for the sagittal plane and 0.75-1.0 for the frontal place. Within-user observed agreement was 0.57-1.00 for the sagittal plane and 0.71-1.00 for the frontal plane. Three themes and seven categories were identified from the waveform interpretations: Amount (qualitative and quantitative description), timing (phase, discrete time point, cycle), and nature (peak, range of motion, timing) of the compensation.

Conclusion: There was good agreement between users at identifying the presence of movement compensation from the kinematic waveforms, but there was variation in how movement compensations were described. An interactive report, a standardised template for interpretation of kinematic waveforms, and training to support the clinical application of a movement analysis toolkit are proposed.

Keywords: Compensation strategies; Kinematics; Knee joint; Physiotherapy; Sensors; Wearable technology.