Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 13, 2026
Measuring 3D In-vivo Shoulder Kinematics using Biplanar Videoradiography
Published on: March 12, 2021
Objective assessment, repeatability, and agreement of shoulder ROM with a 3D gyroscope
Bilal Farouk El-Zayat1, Turgay Efe, Annett Heidrich
1Department of Orthopaedics and Rheumatology, University Hospital Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, Marburg, 35033, Germany. elzayat@med.uni-marburg.de
Background:
Assessment of shoulder mobility is essential for diagnosis and clinical follow-up of shoulder diseases. Only a few highly sophisticated instruments for objective measurements of shoulder mobility are available. The recently introduced DynaPort MiniMod TriGyro ShoulderTest-System (DP) was validated earlier in laboratory trials. We aimed to assess the precision (repeatability) and agreement of this instrument in human subjects, as compared to the conventional goniometer.
Methods:
The DP is a small, light-weight, three-dimensional gyroscope that can be fixed on the distal upper arm, recording shoulder abduction, flexion, and rotation. Twenty-one subjects (42 shoulders) were included for analysis. Two subsequent assessments of the same subject with a 30-minute delay in testing of each shoulder were performed with the DP in two directions (flexion and abduction), and simultaneously correlated with the measurements of a conventional goniometer. All assessments were performed by one observer. Repeatability for each method was determined and compared as the statistical variance between two repeated measurements. Agreement was illustrated by Bland-Altman-Plots with 95% limits of agreement. Statistical analysis was performed with a linear mixed regression model. Variance for repeated measurements by the same method was also estimated and compared with the likelihood-ratio test.
Results:
Evaluation of abduction showed significantly better repeatability for the DP compared to the conventional goniometer (error variance: DP = 0.89, goniometer = 8.58, p = 0.025). No significant differences were found for flexion (DP = 1.52, goniometer = 5.94, p = 0.09). Agreement assessment was performed for flexion for mean differences of 0.27° with 95% limit of agreement ranging from -7.97° to 8.51°. For abduction, the mean differences were 1.19° with a 95% limit of agreement ranging from -9.07° to 11.46°.
Conclusion:
In summary, DP demonstrated a high precision even higher than the conventional goniometer. Agreement between both methods is acceptable, with possible deviations of up to greater than 10°. Therefore, static measurements with DP are more precise than conventional goniometer measurements. These results are promising for routine clinical use of the DP.
