Comparative Assessment of an IMU-Based Wearable Device and a Marker-Based Optoelectronic System in Trunk Motion Analysis: A Cross-Sectional Investigation

Wearable inertial measurement units (IMUs) are increasingly used in human motion analysis due to their ability to measure movement in real-world environments. However, with rapid technological advancement and a wide variety of models available, it is essential to evaluate their performance and suitability for analyzing specific body regions. This study aimed to assess the accuracy and precision of an IMU-based sensor in measuring trunk range of motion (ROM). Twenty-seven healthy adults (11 males, 16 females; mean age: 31.1 ± 11.0 years) participated. Each performed trunk movements—flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation—while angular data were recorded simultaneously using a single IMU and a marker-based optoelectronic motion capture (MoCap) system. Analyses included accuracy indices, Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r), concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and Bland–Altman limits of agreement. The IMU showed high accuracy in rotation (92.4%), with strong correlation (r = 0.944, p < 0.001) and excellent agreement [CCC = 0.927; (0.977–0.957)]. Flexion (72.1%), extension (64.1%), and lateral bending (61.4%) showed moderate accuracy and correlations (r = 0.703, 0.564, and 0.430, p < 0.05). The RMSE ranged from 1.09° (rotation) to 3.01° (flexion). While the IMU consistently underestimated ROM, its accuracy in rotation highlights its potential as a cost-effective MoCap alternative, warranting further study for broader clinical use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Sciences
Published
2025-05-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/app15115931
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
14.28
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Assessment of an IMU-Based Wearable Device and a Marker-Based Optoelectronic System in Trunk Motion Analysis: A Cross-Sectional Investigation

Verônica Cimolin, Manuela Galli, Massimiliano Pau, Fulvio Dal Farra et al.
3 citations
Applied Sciences
Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
14.28
article

Comparative Assessment of an IMU-Based Wearable Device and a Marker-Based Optoelectronic System in Trunk Motion Analysis: A Cross-Sectional Investigation

Verônica Cimolin, Manuela Galli, Massimiliano Pau, Fulvio Dal Farra, Serena Cerfoglio, Micaela Porta, Nicola Francesco Lopomo
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Wearable inertial measurement units (IMUs) are increasingly used in human motion analysis due to their ability to measure movement in real-world environments. However, with rapid technological advancement and a wide variety of models available, it is essential to evaluate their performance and suitability for analyzing specific body regions. This study aimed to assess the accuracy and precision of an IMU-based sensor in measuring trunk range of motion (ROM). Twenty-seven healthy adults (11 males, 16 females; mean age: 31.1 ± 11.0 years) participated. Each performed trunk movements—flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation—while angular data were recorded simultaneously using a single IMU and a marker-based optoelectronic motion capture (MoCap) system. Analyses included accuracy indices, Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r), concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and Bland–Altman limits of agreement. The IMU showed high accuracy in rotation (92.4%), with strong correlation (r = 0.944, p < 0.001) and excellent agreement [CCC = 0.927; (0.977–0.957)]. Flexion (72.1%), extension (64.1%), and lateral bending (61.4%) showed moderate accuracy and correlations (r = 0.703, 0.564, and 0.430, p < 0.05). The RMSE ranged from 1.09° (rotation) to 3.01° (flexion). While the IMU consistently underestimated ROM, its accuracy in rotation highlights its potential as a cost-effective MoCap alternative, warranting further study for broader clinical use.

Applied SciencesVol. 15(11)
University of Cagliari (IT), IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano (IT), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), University of Brescia (IT), Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
14.28
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.