Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 19, 2025
Measurement of Dynamic Scapular Kinematics Using an Acromion Marker Cluster to Minimize Skin Movement Artifact
Published on: February 10, 2015
Verification of acromion marker cluster and scapula spinal marker cluster methods for tracking shoulder kinematics: a
Yuki Yoshida1,2, Noboru Matsumura3, Yoshitake Yamada4
1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Background:
This study validated the accuracy of the acromion marker cluster (AMC) and scapula spinal marker cluster (SSMC) methods compared with upright four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) analysis.
Methods:
Sixteen shoulders of eight healthy males underwent AMC and SSMC assessments. Active shoulder elevation was tracked using upright 4DCT and optical motion capture system. The scapulothoracic and glenohumeral rotation angles calculated from AMC and SSMC were compared with 4DCT. Additionally, the motion of these marker clusters on the skin with shoulder elevation was evaluated.
Results:
The average differences between AMC and 4DCT during 10°-140° of humerothoracic elevation were - 2.2° ± 7.5° in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 14.0° ± 7.4° in internal rotation, 6.5° ± 7.5° in posterior tilting, 3.7° ± 8.1° in glenohumeral elevation, - 8.3° ± 10.7° in external rotation, and - 8.6° ± 8.9° in anterior plane of elevation. The difference between AMC and 4DCT was significant at 120° of humerothoracic elevation in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 50° in internal rotation, 90° in posterior tilting, 120° in glenohumeral elevation, 100° in external rotation, and 100° in anterior plane of elevation. However, the average differences between SSMC and 4DCT were - 7.5 ± 7.7° in scapulothoracic upward rotation, 2.0° ± 7.0° in internal rotation, 2.3° ± 7.2° in posterior tilting, 8.8° ± 7.9° in glenohumeral elevation, 2.0° ± 9.1° in external rotation, and 1.9° ± 10.1° in anterior plane of elevation. The difference between SSMC and 4DCT was significant at 50° of humerothoracic elevation in scapulothoracic upward rotation and 60° in glenohumeral elevation, with no significant differences observed in other rotations. Skin motion was significantly smaller in AMC (28.7 ± 4.0 mm) than SSMC (38.6 ± 5.8 mm). Although there was smaller skin motion in AMC, SSMC exhibited smaller differences in scapulothoracic internal rotation, posterior tilting, glenohumeral external rotation, and anterior plane of elevation compared to 4DCT.
Conclusion:
This study demonstrates that AMC is more accurate for assessing scapulothoracic upward rotation and glenohumeral elevation, while SSMC is preferable for evaluating scapulothoracic internal rotation, posterior tilting, glenohumeral external rotation, and anterior plane of elevation, with smaller differences compared to 4DCT.
