This study aims to compare a new inertial measurement unit based system with the highly accurate but complex laboratory gold standard, an optoelectronic motion capture system. Inertial measurement units are sensors based on accelerometers, gyroscopes, and/or magnetometers. Ten healthy subjects were recorded while performing flexion-extension and radial-ulnar deviation movements of their right wrist using inertial sensors and skin markers. Maximum range of motion during these trials and mean absolute difference between the systems were calculated. A difference of 10° ± 5° for flexion-extension and 2° ± 1° for radial-ulnar deviation was found between the two systems with absolute range of motion values of 126° and 50° in the respective axes. A Wilcoxon rank sum test resulted in a no statistical differences between the systems with p-values of 0.24 and 0.62. The observed results are even more precise than reports from previous studies, where differences between 14° and 27° for flexion-extension and differences between 6° and 17° for radial-ulnar deviation were found. Effortless and fast applicability, good precision, and low inter-observer variability make inertial measurement unit based systems applicable to clinical settings.

The purpose of this study was to develop a motion analysis protocol that allows the simultaneous assessment of all hand and finger joint movements. The objective was to demonstrate repeatability for future clinical applications in functional assessments. This study includes selection of marker positions, movement tasks, kinematic approaches and a comparison of the two most commonly used finger marker sets. By using a test–retest measurement of the range of motion in twenty healthy volunteers, the repeatability of the developed protocol was validated. Estimated errors of the presented method ranged from 1.2° to 6.4°. Finger joint angles derived from the marker set with two markers per segment showed better repeatability (3.7°) than with markers located on the joints (5.1°). Given the high repeatability found, the presented method appears to be suitable for clinical applications. For the fingers, measurement repeatability can be improved by using at least two markers per segment. Within this study, advanced kinematic approaches, such as functional determination of joint centers and axes, are applied to the analysis of hand movements. The provided standard values and estimate of the minimal detectable differences provide a valuable basis for meaningful data interpretation and may be used for future comparison with other protocols.

Background: This study investigates the dart-throwing motion (DTM) by comparing an inertial measurement unit-based system previously validated for basic motion tasks with an optoelectronic motion capture system. The DTM is interesting as wrist movement during many activities of daily living occur in this movement plane, but the complex movement is difficult to assess clinically. Methods: Ten healthy subjects were recorded while performing the DTM with their right wrist using inertial sensors and skin markers. Maximum range of motion obtained by the different systems and the mean absolute difference were calculated. Results: In the flexion–extension plane, both systems calculated a range of motion of 100° with mean absolute differences of 8°, while in the radial–ulnar deviation plane, a mean absolute difference of 17° and range of motion values of 48° for the optoelectronic system and 59° for the inertial measurement units were found. Conclusions: This study shows the challenge of comparing results of different kinematic motion capture systems for complex movements while also highlighting inertial measurement units as promising for future clinical application in dynamic and coupled wrist movements. Possible sources of error and solutions are discussed.

Introduction: The purpose of the study was to describe thumb kinematics and function during basic motion tasks and activities of daily living following different surgical techniques for trapeziometacarpal (TMC) joint osteoarthritis using a three-dimensional motion capture system. Methods: Included were 24 patients (29 thumbs) following Wilson osteotomy, Touch prosthesis arthroplasty and trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) at a minimum of 12 months postoperatively. Results: During basic motion tasks, it was observed that patients after LRTI showed alterations in most of the assessed movements, while osteotomy and Touch patients showed a preserved range of motion. Altered mobility of the TMC joint was more evident in the combined movements of opposition or circumduction compared with standard anatomical planes. In activities of daily living, we found a similar range of motion of the trapeziometacarpal joint in all groups, but different movements in the adjacent joints, including marked hyperextension of the metacarpophalangeal joint in the LRTI group. Conclusion: Our study found different preservation of the maximal ROM following different TMC joint procedures. Information about the higher preserved range of motion following osteotomy and arthroplasty may be additional factors for consideration when choosing a procedure. Three-dimensional assessment of thumb kinematics after various trapeziometacarpal joint surgeries can enhance our understanding of expected outcomes and can also aid in postoperative assessment and patient education. Level of evidence: III

Eccentric finger movements have been identified as risk factor in the injury mechanism of pulley ruptures during climbing. So far, they have mainly been associated with inadvertent events. Whether eccentric movements also occur as regular motion patterns was not assessed. Main purpose of this study was to examine eccentric finger movements during typical climbing tasks. Therefore, kinematics and interaction force of eleven elite climbers was recorded during a sequence of four climbing moves. Participants were instructed to use crimp, half-crimp, open-hand grip and campusing. Change of flexion angle in the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints from the start to the end of the holding phase (ΔPIP_P2) was calculated. Mean ΔPIP_P2 was -1.5° (SD 6.6°), 0.2° (5.1°), -2.9° (3.4°) and -6.0° (9.6°) for the open-hand, half-crimp, crimp and campusing task, respectively, whereby negative values represent eccentric movements. Eccentric finger joint movements (ΔPIP_P2 < 0°) during the holding phase were very common (59-73%) across all grip types. The loading rate was highest during campusing and lowest using the crimp grip. Climbers exhibit eccentric finger movements not only during accidental slips or when fatigued, but also as consistent patterns. Further research is needed to assess whether these differences are associated with an individual's risk of pulley injury.