Which method should we use to determine the hip joint center location in individuals with a high amount of soft tissue?

Brian Horsak; Sebastian Durstberger; Philipp Krondorfer; Alexandra Thajer; Susanne Greber-Platzer; Andreas Kranzl

doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106254

Which method should we use to determine the hip joint center location in individuals with a high amount of soft tissue?

Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2024 Apr 18:115:106254. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106254. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Brian Horsak¹, Sebastian Durstberger², Philipp Krondorfer³, Alexandra Thajer⁴, Susanne Greber-Platzer⁴, Andreas Kranzl⁵

Affiliations

¹ Center for Digital Health and Social Innovation, St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences, Campus-Platz 1, St. Pölten 3100, Austria; Institute of Health Sciences, St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences, Campus-Platz 1, St. Pölten 3100, Austria. Electronic address: brian.horsak@fhstp.ac.at.
² FH Campus Wien - University of Applied Sciences, Department Health Sciences, Favoritenstrasse 226, 1100 Vienna, Austria; Orthopaedic Hospital Speising, Laboratory of Gait and Movement Analysis, Speisinger Str. 109, Vienna 1130, Austria.
³ Center for Digital Health and Social Innovation, St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences, Campus-Platz 1, St. Pölten 3100, Austria.
⁴ Clinical Division of Pediatric Pulmonology, Allergology and Endocrinology, Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Guertel 18-20, Vienna 1090, Austria.
⁵ Orthopaedic Hospital Speising, Laboratory of Gait and Movement Analysis, Speisinger Str. 109, Vienna 1130, Austria.

PMID: 38669918
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106254

Abstract

Background: This study investigated the most accurate method for estimating the hip joint center position in clinical 3D gait analysis for young individuals with high amounts of soft tissue. We compared position estimates of five regression-based and two functional methods to the hip joint center position obtained through 3D free-hand ultrasound.

Methods: For this purpose, the data of 14 overweight or obese individuals with a mean age of 13.6 (SD 2.1 yrs) and a BMI of 36.5 (SD 7.1 kg/m², range 26-52 kg/m²) who underwent standard clinical 3D gait analysis were used. The data of each participant were processed with five regression-based and two functional methods and compared to the hip joint center identified via 3D free-hand ultrasound.

Findings: The absolute location errors to 3D free-hand ultrasound for each anatomical plane and the Euclidean distances served as outcomes next to their effects on gait variables. The data suggest that regression-based methods are preferable to functional methods in this population, as the latter demonstrated the highest variability in accuracy with large errors for some individuals.

Interpretation: Based on our findings we recommend using the regression method presented by Hara et al. due to its superior overall accuracy of <9 mm on average in all planes and the lowest impact on kinematic and kinetic output variables. We do not recommend using the Harrington equations (single and multiple) in populations with high amounts of soft tissue as they require pelvic depth as input, which can be massively biased when a lot of soft tissue is present around the pelvis.

Keywords: 3D free-hand ultrasound; Gait analysis; HJC; Joint angles; Joint moments; Medical imaging.