[Comparison of the reliability of two 3D acquisition systems used for the study of anthropometric and postural...

The goal of this study is to compare the between trials and between session reliability of the postural geometry (PG) and anthropometrical evaluations, obtained by the FreePoint (FP) system and the Motion Analysis System (MA). The potential of automatization of the anthropometric evaluation is also evaluate through the comparison of height measurements obtained by the two 3D systems and traditional anthropometrical tools. The PG of 15 adult control subjects (x: 25 years, SD: 6) evaluated on two occasions (1 week interval) and a mannequin on one occasion were evaluated with both systems. Each evaluation involved the identification of 52 anatomical landmarks followed by the acquisition of 5 trials with each system. The 3 dimensional position of the anatomical landmarks serves to define a postural model including the shoulder girdle, spinous processes (T1 to S1), thorax, pelvis, lower extremities and base of support. Postural parameters were calculated, including rotations, tilts, versions, kyphosis, lordosis, right and left Cobb, anteroposterior shifts, (AP), mediolateral shifts (ML) and vertical heights. The between trials and between session results demonstrate a strong correspondence of the 15 anthropometric heights and the 20 postural parameters between the three systems, permitting the proposal of a broadened clinical utilisation of the FreePoint system. However, the validity of these measures is influenced by the reliability of the anthropometric landmarking, natural oscillation of the body and the intra-specific variation of the posture of each subject.