Accuracy of a Low-Cost 3D-Printed Wearable Goniometer for Measuring Wrist Motion

Wrist motion provides an important metric for disease monitoring and occupational risk assessment. The collection of wrist kinematics in occupational or other real-world environments could augment traditional observational or video-analysis based assessment. We have developed a low-cost 3D printed w...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Switzerland), 2021-07, Vol.21 (14), p.4799
Main Authors: Young, Calvin, DeDecker, Sarah, Anderson, Drew, Oliver, Michele L., Gordon, Karen D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Calibration
Communication
electromechanical goniometry
Goniometers
Kinematics
Low cost
Motion capture
occupational biomechanics
Range of motion
Risk assessment
Sensors
Wearable computers
wearable device
Wearable technology
Wrist
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:Wrist motion provides an important metric for disease monitoring and occupational risk assessment. The collection of wrist kinematics in occupational or other real-world environments could augment traditional observational or video-analysis based assessment. We have developed a low-cost 3D printed wearable device, capable of being produced on consumer grade desktop 3D printers. Here we present a preliminary validation of the device against a gold standard optical motion capture system. Data were collected from 10 participants performing a static angle matching task while seated at a desk. The wearable device output was significantly correlated with the optical motion capture system yielding a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.991 and 0.972 for flexion/extension (FE) and radial/ulnar deviation (RUD) respectively (p < 0.0001). Error was similarly low with a root mean squared error of 4.9° (FE) and 3.9° (RUD). Agreement between the two systems was quantified using Bland–Altman analysis, with bias and 95% limits of agreement of 3.1° ± 7.4° and −0.16° ± 7.7° for FE and RUD, respectively. These results compare favourably with current methods for occupational assessment, suggesting strong potential for field implementation.
ISSN:1424-8220
1424-8220
DOI:10.3390/s21144799