Reliability and concurrent validity between two-dimensional and three-dimensional evaluations of knee valgus during drop jumps
Authors Ortiz A, Rosario-Canales M, Rodríguez A, Seda A, Figueroa C, Venegas-Ríos H
Received 10 November 2015
Accepted for publication 11 March 2016
Published 27 May 2016 Volume 2016:7 Pages 65—73
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewer comments 4
Editor who approved publication: Prof. Dr. Andreas Imhoff
Alexis Ortiz1, Martin Rosario-Canales2,3, Alejandro Rodríguez3, Alexie Seda3, Carla Figueroa3, Heidi L Venegas-Ríos4
1School of Physical Therapy, Texas Woman’s University, Houston, TX, 2Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, 3Department of Physical Therapy, University of Puerto Rico, Medical Sciences Campus, San Juan, PR, 4School of Nutrition & Food Sciences, Texas Woman’s University, Houston, TX, USA
Purpose: The aim of this study was to establish the concurrent validity and reliability of four different two-dimensional (2D) video-based techniques for quantifying frontal plane knee kinematics during a 40 cm double-legged drop jump.
Participants and methods: A convenience sample of 16 healthy participants (nine males and seven females; age: [mean ± standard deviation] 25.5±2 years; body mass index: 24.33±2.98 kg/m2) participated in this investigation. A total of five trials during a 40 cm drop jump maneuver with a countermovement jump were used as the functional task. Four knee valgus measures, such as two different frontal plane projection angle measures, knee-to-ankle separation ratio (KASR), and knee separation distance (KSD), were measured using 2D and three-dimensional (3D) systems. To generalize to the greater population of possible evaluators, the testers performing the biomechanical analyses were three novice physical therapists. Intra- and intertester intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were estimated for 2D analysis variables. ICCs were estimated for all measures between systems to determine concurrent validity of the 2D system.
Results: All four 2D measures showed good to excellent reliability (ICC: 0.89–0.99). KASR and KSD showed excellent correlation (ICC: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.82–0.98 and ICC: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.90–0.96, respectively) with the 3D system, while both methods of frontal plane projection angle showed poor to moderate correlation (ICC: 0–0.57) with the 3D system.
Conclusion: 2D KASR and KSD measures are cost effective, reliable, and highly correlated with the same measures using 3D techniques for the evaluation of knee valgus.
Keywords: Dartfish, Vicon, motion analysis, correlation
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]