The Validity of a Three-Dimensional Motion Capture System and the Garmin Running Dynamics Pod in Connection with an Assessment of Ground Contact Time While Running in Place

A three-dimensional motion capture system (MoCap) and the Garmin Running Dynamics Pod can be utilised to monitor a variety of dynamic parameters during running. The present investigation was designed to examine the validity of these two systems for determining ground contact times while running in p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Switzerland), 2023-08, Vol.23 (16), p.7155
Main Authors: Drobnič, Miha, Verdel, Nina, Holmberg, Hans-Christer, Supej, Matej
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
3D kinematics
accelerometer
Accuracy
Algorithms
Analysis
Avionics industry
Biomechanics
Cameras
Centre - Centre for Sports and Performance Technology (SPORTC)
Centrumbildning - Centrum för idrotts- och prestationsteknologi (SPORTC)
Communication
Computer animation
Computer programs
Exercise
Fitness equipment
Force
force plate
Fysioterapi
Humidity
IMU
inertial sensor
Laboratories
Metabolism
Motion capture
Physical fitness
Physiotherapy
Running
Sensors
wearables
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A three-dimensional motion capture system (MoCap) and the Garmin Running Dynamics Pod can be utilised to monitor a variety of dynamic parameters during running. The present investigation was designed to examine the validity of these two systems for determining ground contact times while running in place by comparing the values obtained with those provided by the bilateral force plate (gold standard). Eleven subjects completed three 20-s runs in place at self-selected rates, starting slowly, continuing at an intermediate pace, and finishing rapidly. The ground contact times obtained with both systems differed significantly from the gold standard at all three rates, as well as for all the rates combined (p < 0.001 in all cases), with the smallest mean bias at the fastest step rate for both (11.5 ± 14.4 ms for MoCap and −81.5 ± 18.4 ms for Garmin). This algorithm was developed for the determination of ground contact times during normal running and was adapted here for the assessment of running in place by the MoCap, which could be one explanation for its lack of validity. In conclusion, the wearables developed for monitoring normal running cannot be assumed to be suitable for determining ground contact times while running in place.
ISSN:1424-8220
1424-8220
DOI:10.3390/s23167155