Whole-body lifting strategies could be derived from conventional video recordings using the Stoop-Squat-Index, which quantifies the ratio between trunk forward lean and lower extremity joint flexion from 0 (full squat) to 100 (full stoop). The purpose of this study was to compare Stoop-Squat-Indices derived from conventional video recordings to those from a three-dimensional marker-based motion capture system and to evaluate interrater and intrarater reliability of the video-based approach. Thirty healthy participants lifted a 5-kg box under different conditions (freestyle, squat, stoop). Kinematic data were recorded using a Vicon motion capture system (serving as reference standard) and an iPad camera. Stoop-Squat-Indices over the entire lifting cycle were derived separately from both approaches. Agreement was assessed using mean differences (video minus motion capture) and limits of agreement. Reliability was investigated by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and minimal detectable changes (MDC) over the course of the lifting cycle. Systematic errors were identified with Statistical Parametric Mapping-based T-tests. Systematic errors between the video-based and the motion capture-based approach were observed among all conditions. Mean differences in Stoop-Squat-Indices over the lifting cycle ranged from 6.9 to 3.2 (freestyle), from 1.8 to 5.3 (squat) and from 2.8 to 1.1 (stoop). Limits of agreement were lower when the box was close to the floor, and higher towards upright standing. Reliability of the video-based approach was excellent for most of the lifting cycle, with ICC above 0.995 and MDC below 3.5. These findings support using a video-based assessment of Stoop-Squat-Indices to quantify whole body lifting strategy in field.

Background and Purpose Although the relevance of understanding spinal kinematics during functional activities in patients with complex spinal deformities is undisputed among researchers and clinicians, evidence using skin marker-based motion capture systems is still limited to a handful of studies, mostly conducted on healthy subjects and using non-validated marker configurations. The current study therefore aimed to explore the validity of a previously developed enhanced trunk marker set for the static measurement of spinal curvature angles in patients with main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. In addition, the impact of inaccurate marker placement on curvature angle calculation was investigated. Methods Ten patients (Cobb angle: 44.4±17.7 degrees) were equipped with radio-opaque markers on selected spinous processes and underwent a standard biplanar radiographic examination. Subsequently, radio-opaque markers were replaced with retro-reflective markers and the patients were measured statically using a Vicon motion capture system. Thoracolumbar / lumbar and thoracic curvature angles in the sagittal and frontal planes were calculated based on the centers of area of the vertebral bodies and radio-opaque markers as well as the three-dimensional position of the retro-reflective markers. To investigate curvature angle estimation accuracy, linear regression analyses among the respective parameters were used. The impact of inaccurate marker placement was explored using linear regression analyses among the radio-opaque marker- and spinous process-derived curvature angles. Results and Discussion The results demonstrate that curvatures angles in the sagittal plane can be measured with reasonable accuracy, whereas in the frontal plane, angles were systematically underestimated, mainly due to the positional and structural deformities of the scoliotic vertebrae. Inaccuracy of marker placement had a greater impact on thoracolumbar / lumbar than thoracic curvature angles. It is suggested that spinal curvature measurements are included in marker-based clinical gait analysis protocols in order to enable a deeper understanding of the biomechanical behavior of the healthy and pathological spine in dynamic situations as well as to comprehensively evaluate treatment effects.