Rachel Senden

Dr. Rachel Senden

Dept. Physiotherapy MUMC+ and Dept. Movement Sciences UM
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 August 2009 in Gait & Posture
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RSRachel Senden
Rachel Senden
BGB. Grimm
B. Grimm
IHI.C. Heyligers
I.C. Heyligers
HSH.H.C.M. Savelberg
H.H.C.M. Savelberg
KMKenneth Meijer
Kenneth Meijer

19 December 2015 in Medical Engineering & Physics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SBS.A.A.N. Bolink
S.A.A.N. Bolink
HNH. Naisas
H. Naisas
RSRachel Senden
Rachel Senden
HEH. Essers
H. Essers
IHI.C. Heyligers
I.C. Heyligers
BGB. Grimm
B. Grimm
An inertial measurement unit (IMU) allows kinematic evaluation of human motion with fewer operational constraints than a gold standard optoelectronic motion capture (MOCAP) system. The study's aim was to compare IMU and MOCAP measurements of dynamic pelvic orientation angles during different activities of daily life (ADL): gait, sit-to-stand (STS) transfers and block step-up (BS) transfers. A single IMU was attached onto the lower back in seventeen healthy participants (8F/9 M, age 19-31 years; BMI < 25) and optical skin markers were attached onto anatomical pelvic landmarks for MOCAP measurements. Comparisons between IMU and MOCAP by Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that measurements were between 2SD of the absolute difference and Pearson's correlation coefficients were between 0.85 and 0.94. Frontal plane pelvic angle estimations achieved a RMSE in the range of [2.7°-4.5°] and sagittal plane measurements achieved a RMSE in the range of [2.7°-8.9°] which were both lowest in gait. Waveform peak detection times demonstrated ICCs between 0.96 and 1.00. These results are in accordance to other studies comparing IMU and MOCAP measurements with different applications and suggest that an IMU is a valid tool to measure dynamic pelvic angles during various activities of daily life which could be applied to monitor rehabilitation in a wide variety of musculoskeletal disorders.

1 June 2012 in Gait & Posture
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RSRachel Senden
Rachel Senden
HSH.H.C.M. Savelberg
H.H.C.M. Savelberg
BGB. Grimm
B. Grimm
IHI.C. Heyligers
I.C. Heyligers
KMKenneth Meijer
Kenneth Meijer

1 October 2011 in The Knee
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RSRachel Senden
Rachel Senden
BGBernd Grimm
Bernd Grimm
KMKenneth Meijer
Kenneth Meijer
HSHans Savelberg
Hans Savelberg
IHIde C. Heyligers
Ide C. Heyligers

1 June 2014 in The Knee
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RDRemco N. Dinjens
Remco N. Dinjens
RSRachel Senden
Rachel Senden
IHIde C. Heyligers
Ide C. Heyligers
BGBernd Grimm
Bernd Grimm

1 October 2017 in Journal of Orthopaedic Translation
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MLMatthijs Lipperts
Matthijs Lipperts
SLS.N. Van Laarhoven
S.N. Van Laarhoven
RSRachel Senden
Rachel Senden
IHIde Heyligers
Ide Heyligers
BGBernd Grimm
Bernd Grimm
Activity is increasingly being recognized as a highly relevant parameter in all areas of healthcare for diagnosis, treatment, or outcome assessment, especially in orthopaedics where the movement apparatus is directly affected. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop, describe, and clinically validate a generic activity-monitoring algorithm, satisfying a combination of three criteria. The algorithm must be able to identify, count, and time a large set of relevant daily activities. It must be validated for orthopaedic patients as well as healthy individuals, and the validation must be in a setting that mimics free-living conditions. Using various technical solutions, such as a dual-axis approach, dynamic inclinometry (hip flexion), and semiautomatic calibration (gait speed), the algorithms were designed to count and time the following postures, transfers, and activities of daily living: resting/sitting, standing, walking, ascending and descending stairs, sit-stand transitions, and cycling. In addition, the number of steps per walking bout was determined. Validation was performed with healthy individuals and patients who had undergone unilateral total joint arthroplasty, representing a wide spectrum of functional capacity. Video observation was used as the gold standard to count and time activities in a validation protocol approaching free-living conditions. In total 992 and 390 events (activities or postures) were recorded in the healthy group and patient group, respectively. The mean error varied between 0% and 2.8% for the healthy group and between 0% and 7.5% for the patient group. The error expressed in percentage of time varied between 2.0% and 3.0% for both groups. Activity monitoring of orthopaedic patients by counting and timing a large set of relevant daily life events is feasible in a user- and patient-friendly way and at high clinical validity using a generic three-dimensional accelerometer and algorithms based on empirical and physical methods. The algorithms performed well for healthy individuals as well as patients recovering after total joint replacement in a challenging validation set-up. With such a simple and transparent method real-life activity parameters can be collected in orthopaedic practice for diagnostics, treatments, outcome assessment, or biofeedback.