Reliability of the Elliptical Zone Method of Estimating Body Segment Parameters of Swimmers

Overview

Journal J Sports Sci Med

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2015 Mar 3

PMID 25729310

Citations 5

Authors

Ross H Sanders

Chuang-Yuan Chiu

Tomohiro Gonjo

Jacki Thow

Nuno Oliveira

Stelios G Psycharakis

Carl J Payton

Carla B McCabe

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Due to the difficulty of measuring forces and torques acting on a swimmer during mid-pool swimming, an inverse dynamics approach is required. Personalised body segment parameter (BSP) data enabling calculation of net forces and torques can be obtained using the elliptical zone method. The purpose of this study was to establish the reliability of estimating BSP data of swimmers by the elliptical zone method with segment outlines being traced manually on a personal computer screen. Five assessors digitised the segment landmarks and traced the body segments from front and side view digital photographs of 11 single arm amputee swimmers. Each swimmer was assessed five times by each of the five assessors. The order was fully randomised. Within assessor variability was less than 5% for the segment centre of mass position of all segments, for segment length except the neck (5.2%), and for segment mass except neck (11.9%), hands (Left: 8.1%; Right: 5.8%) and feet (Left: 7.3%; Right: 7.3%). Analysis of mean variability within and between assessors indicated that between assessor variability was generally as large or larger than within assessor variability. Consequently it is recommended that when seeking personalised BSP data to maximise the accuracy of derived kinetics and sensitivity for longitudinal and bilateral within-subject comparisons the individual should be assessed by the same assessor with mean values obtained from five repeat digitisations. This study established that using the elliptical zone method using E-Zone software is a reliable and convenient way of obtaining personalised BSP data for use in analysis of swimming. Key pointsA unique (not been attempted previously) study of reliability of calculating personalised Body Segment Parameter (BSP) data using the elliptical zone methodEstablishes benchmark data regarding the reliability of BSP data for comparison with emerging technologies for obtaining personalised BSP data non-invasively.Provides a description and guidelines for good practice for maximising the accuracy of derived kinematics and kinetics in swimming.The method of body modelling described can also be applied to studies in other sports and in assessing change in health status related to body shape characteristics for sport and non-sport populations.

Citing Articles

Body roll amplitude and timing in backstroke swimming and their differences from front crawl at the same swimming intensities.

Gonjo T, Fernandes R, Vilas-Boas J, Sanders R Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):824.

PMID: 33436944 PMC: 7804020. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80711-5.

Front Crawl Is More Efficient and Has Smaller Active Drag Than Backstroke Swimming: Kinematic and Kinetic Comparison Between the Two Techniques at the Same Swimming Speeds.

Gonjo T, Narita K, McCabe C, Fernandes R, Vilas-Boas J, Takagi H Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020; 8:570657.

PMID: 33072727 PMC: 7543982. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.570657.

Predictive regression modeling of body segment parameters using individual-based anthropometric measurements.

Merrill Z, Perera S, Cham R J Biomech. 2019; 96:109349.

PMID: 31615644 PMC: 6905426. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.109349.

Differences in kinematics and energy cost between front crawl and backstroke below the anaerobic threshold.

Gonjo T, McCabe C, Sousa A, Ribeiro J, Fernandes R, Vilas-Boas J Eur J Appl Physiol. 2018; 118(6):1107-1118.

PMID: 29556773 DOI: 10.1007/s00421-018-3841-z.

Reliability of Three-Dimensional Angular Kinematics and Kinetics of Swimming Derived from Digitized Video.

Sanders R, Gonjo T, McCabe C J Sports Sci Med. 2016; 15(1):158-66.

PMID: 26957939 PMC: 4763835.

References

Jensen R . Body segment mass, radius and radius of gyration proportions of children. J Biomech. 1986; 19(5):359-68. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(86)90012-6. View

Payton C, Bartlett R, Baltzopoulos V, Coombs R . Upper extremity kinematics and body roll during preferred-side breathing and breath-holding front crawl swimming. J Sports Sci. 1999; 17(9):689-96. DOI: 10.1080/026404199365551. View

Martin P, Mungiole M, Marzke M, Longhill J . The use of magnetic resonance imaging for measuring segment inertial properties. J Biomech. 1989; 22(4):367-76. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(89)90051-1. View

Jensen R . Growth of estimated segment masses between four and sixteen years. Hum Biol. 1987; 59(1):173-89. View

Psycharakis S, Sanders R . Body roll in swimming: a review. J Sports Sci. 2010; 28(3):229-36. DOI: 10.1080/02640410903508847. View

Jensen R . Changes in segment inertia proportions between 4 and 20 years. J Biomech. 1989; 22(6-7):529-36. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(89)90004-3. View

Yanai T . Buoyancy is the primary source of generating bodyroll in front-crawl swimming. J Biomech. 2004; 37(5):605-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2003.10.004. View

Psycharakis S, Sanders R . Shoulder and hip roll changes during 200-m front crawl swimming. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008; 40(12):2129-36. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31818160bc. View

Jensen R, Fletcher P . Distribution of mass to the segments of elderly males and females. J Biomech. 1994; 27(1):89-96. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(94)90035-3. View

10.

Dapena J . A method to determine the angular momentum of a human body about three orthogonal axes passing through its center of gravity. J Biomech. 1978; 11(5):251-6. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(78)90051-9. View

11.

Pearsall D, Reid J, Livingston L . Segmental inertial parameters of the human trunk as determined from computed tomography. Ann Biomed Eng. 1996; 24(2):198-210. DOI: 10.1007/BF02667349. View

12.

Yanai T . Rotational effect of buoyancy in frontcrawl: Does it really cause the legs to sink?. J Biomech. 2001; 34(2):235-43. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(00)00186-x. View

13.

Jensen R . The growth of children's moment of inertia. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1986; 18(4):440-5. View

14.

Durkin J, Dowling J, Andrews D . The measurement of body segment inertial parameters using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. J Biomech. 2002; 35(12):1575-80. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(02)00227-0. View

15.

Psycharakis S, McCabe C . Shoulder and hip roll differences between breathing and non-breathing conditions in front crawl swimming. J Biomech. 2011; 44(9):1752-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.04.004. View

16.

Damavandi M, Farahpour N, Allard P . Determination of body segment masses and centers of mass using a force plate method in individuals of different morphology. Med Eng Phys. 2009; 31(9):1187-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2009.07.015. View

17.

Lee C, Sanders R, Payton C . Changes in force production and stroke parameters of trained able-bodied and unilateral arm-amputee female swimmers during a 30 s tethered front-crawl swim. J Sports Sci. 2014; 32(18):1704-11. DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2014.915420. View

18.

Jensen R . Estimation of the biomechanical properties of three body types using a photogrammetric method. J Biomech. 1978; 11(8-9):349-58. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(78)90069-6. View

19.

Psycharakis S, Sanders R . Validity of the use of a fixed point for intracycle velocity calculations in swimming. J Sci Med Sport. 2008; 12(2):262-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2007.11.008. View

20.

Figueiredo P, Boas J, Maia J, Goncalves P, Fernandes R . Does the hip reflect the centre of mass swimming kinematics?. Int J Sports Med. 2009; 30(11):779-81. DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1234059. View