Feasibility of a kinect-based system in assessing physical function of the elderly for home-based care.
Kinect
Motion analysis
Physical fitness
Reproducibility of results
Telemedicine
Validation studies
Journal
BMC geriatrics
ISSN: 1471-2318
Titre abrégé: BMC Geriatr
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968548
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 08 2023
16 08 2023
Historique:
received:
08
12
2022
accepted:
18
07
2023
medline:
18
8
2023
pubmed:
17
8
2023
entrez:
16
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
With concerns about accurate diagnosis through telehealth, the Kinect sensor offers a reliable solution for movement analysis. However, there is a lack of practical research investigating the suitability of a Kinect-based system as a functional fitness assessment tool in homecare settings. Hence, the objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using a Kinect-based system to assess physical function changes in the elderly. The study consisted of two phases. Phase one involved 35 young healthy adults, evaluating the reliability and validity of a Kinect-based fitness evaluation compared to traditional physical examination using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Phase two involved 665 elderly subjects, examining the correlation between the Kinect-based fitness evaluation and physical examination through Pearson's correlation coefficients. A Kinect sensor (Microsoft Xbox One Kinect V2) with customized software was employed to capture and compute the movement of joint centers. Both groups performed seven functional assessments simultaneously monitored by a physical therapist and the Kinect system. System usability and user satisfaction were assessed using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction (QUIS), respectively. Kinect-based system showed overall moderate to excellent within-day reliability (ICC = 0.633-1.0) and between-day reliability (ICC = 0.686-1.0). The overall agreement between the two devices was highly correlated (r ≧ 0.7) for all functional assessment tests in young healthy adults. The Kinect-based system also showed a high correlation with physical examination for the functional assessments (r = 0.858-0.988) except functional reach (r = 0.484) and walking speed(r = 0.493). The users' satisfaction with the system was excellent (SUS score = 84.4 ± 18.5; QUIS score = 6.5-6.7). The reliability and validity of Kinect for assessing functional performance are generally favorable. Nonetheless, caution is advised when employing Kinect for tasks involving depth changes, such as functional reach and walking speed tests for their moderate validity. However, Kinect's fundamental motion detection capabilities demonstrate its potential for future applications in telerehabilitation in different healthcare settings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
With concerns about accurate diagnosis through telehealth, the Kinect sensor offers a reliable solution for movement analysis. However, there is a lack of practical research investigating the suitability of a Kinect-based system as a functional fitness assessment tool in homecare settings. Hence, the objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using a Kinect-based system to assess physical function changes in the elderly.
METHODS
The study consisted of two phases. Phase one involved 35 young healthy adults, evaluating the reliability and validity of a Kinect-based fitness evaluation compared to traditional physical examination using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Phase two involved 665 elderly subjects, examining the correlation between the Kinect-based fitness evaluation and physical examination through Pearson's correlation coefficients. A Kinect sensor (Microsoft Xbox One Kinect V2) with customized software was employed to capture and compute the movement of joint centers. Both groups performed seven functional assessments simultaneously monitored by a physical therapist and the Kinect system. System usability and user satisfaction were assessed using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction (QUIS), respectively.
RESULTS
Kinect-based system showed overall moderate to excellent within-day reliability (ICC = 0.633-1.0) and between-day reliability (ICC = 0.686-1.0). The overall agreement between the two devices was highly correlated (r ≧ 0.7) for all functional assessment tests in young healthy adults. The Kinect-based system also showed a high correlation with physical examination for the functional assessments (r = 0.858-0.988) except functional reach (r = 0.484) and walking speed(r = 0.493). The users' satisfaction with the system was excellent (SUS score = 84.4 ± 18.5; QUIS score = 6.5-6.7).
CONCLUSIONS
The reliability and validity of Kinect for assessing functional performance are generally favorable. Nonetheless, caution is advised when employing Kinect for tasks involving depth changes, such as functional reach and walking speed tests for their moderate validity. However, Kinect's fundamental motion detection capabilities demonstrate its potential for future applications in telerehabilitation in different healthcare settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37587451
doi: 10.1186/s12877-023-04179-4
pii: 10.1186/s12877-023-04179-4
pmc: PMC10429079
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
495Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Gait Posture. 2015 Jul;42(2):210-3
pubmed: 26009500
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2020 Jul;2020:4265-4268
pubmed: 33018938
Nat Commun. 2022 Jul 8;13(1):3942
pubmed: 35803909
Clin Med Res. 2014 Sep;12(1-2):10-20
pubmed: 24415748
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014 May;62(5):889-95
pubmed: 24655228
Sports Med Open. 2018 Jun 05;4(1):24
pubmed: 29869300
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Dec 8;8(12):e21576
pubmed: 33289679
J Med Eng Technol. 2020 May;44(4):198-202
pubmed: 32420771
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 Feb 12;12:15
pubmed: 25884838
J Orthop Sci. 2009 Sep;14(5):675-85
pubmed: 19802686
BMC Geriatr. 2021 Sep 9;21(1):491
pubmed: 34503463
Med Eng Phys. 2020 Feb;76:20-31
pubmed: 31882393
Sensors (Basel). 2021 Jun 10;21(12):
pubmed: 34200838
Healthcare (Basel). 2018 Mar 02;6(1):
pubmed: 29498644
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Dec;56(12):2211-16
pubmed: 19093920
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015 Jan;29(1):48-53
pubmed: 24743227
J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63
pubmed: 27330520
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 13;10(10):e0139913
pubmed: 26461498
BMC Biomed Eng. 2019 Mar 18;1:7
pubmed: 32903310
Sensors (Basel). 2016 Feb 04;16(2):194
pubmed: 26861323
Asian Nurs Res (Korean Soc Nurs Sci). 2016 Mar;10(1):51-5
pubmed: 27021835
J Biomech. 2013 Oct 18;46(15):2722-5
pubmed: 24016679
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Dec 21;8(12):e19608
pubmed: 33346739
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2020 May;8(5):1489-1491
pubmed: 32220575
Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Nov 02;9(11):
pubmed: 34828539
Res Q Exerc Sport. 1999 Jun;70(2):113-9
pubmed: 10380242
Gait Posture. 2019 May;70:330-335
pubmed: 30947108
Int J Med Inform. 2016 Jul;91:44-59
pubmed: 27185508
Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2020 Feb;234(2):131-140
pubmed: 31736408
Gait Posture. 2014 Sep;40(4):532-8
pubmed: 25047828
Gait Posture. 2012 Jul;36(3):372-7
pubmed: 22633015
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Aug 26;20(1):793
pubmed: 32843038
Blood Press Monit. 2013 Feb;18(1):8-15
pubmed: 23275313
N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 30;382(18):1679-1681
pubmed: 32160451
IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2018 Jan;22(1):147-153
pubmed: 28333650
Gerontologist. 2013 Apr;53(2):255-67
pubmed: 22613940
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Mar 06;13:82
pubmed: 23497109
Healthcare (Basel). 2019 Apr 10;7(2):
pubmed: 30974780
BMC Public Health. 2021 Aug 17;21(1):1556
pubmed: 34399716
Nat Rev Mater. 2022;7(11):887-907
pubmed: 35910814
J Biomech. 2017 Jun 14;58:237-240
pubmed: 28549599
J Gerontol. 1990 Nov;45(6):M192-7
pubmed: 2229941