Title

Assessment of a novel algorithm to determine change-of-direction angles while running using inertial sensors

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

ISSN

1533-4287

PubMed ID

30707134

Publisher

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

School

School of Medical and Health Sciences/ School of Engineering/ Center for Exercise and Sports Science Research/ Exercise Medicine Research Institute

RAS ID

27886

Comments

Originally published as: Balloch, A. S., Meghji, M., Newton, R. U., Hart, N. H., Weber, J. A., Ahmad, I. F. T. E. K. H. A. R., & Habibi, D. (2019). Assessment of a Novel Algorithm to Determine Change-of-Direction Angles While Running Using Inertial Sensors. Journal of strength and conditioning research. Advanced Online Publication. Original article available here

Abstract

Balloch, AS, Meghji, M, Newton, RU, Hart, NH, Weber, JA, Ahmad, I, and Habibi, D. Assessment of a novel algorithm to determine change-of-direction angles while running using inertial sensors. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2019-The ability to detect and quantify change-of-direction (COD) movement may offer a unique approach to load-monitoring practice. Validity and reliability of a novel algorithm to calculate COD angles for predetermined COD movements ranging from 45 to 180° in left and right directions was assessed. Five recreationally active men (age: 29.0 ± 0.5 years; height: 181.0 ± 5.6 cm; and body mass: 79.4 ± 5.3 kg) ran 5 consecutive predetermined COD trials each, at 4 different angles (45, 90, 135, and 180°), in each direction. Participants were fitted with a commercially available microtechnology unit where inertial sensor data were extracted and processed using a novel algorithm designed to calculate precise COD angles for direct comparison with a high-speed video (remotely piloted, position-locked aircraft) criterion measure. Validity was assessed using Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement and mean bias. Reliability was assessed using typical error (expressed as a coefficient of variation [CV]). Concurrent validity was present for most angles. Left: (45° = 43.8 ± 2.0°; 90° = 88.1 ± 2.0°; 135° = 136.3 ± 2.1°; and 180° = 181.8 ± 2.5°) and Right: (45° = 46.3 ± 1.6°; 90° = 91.9 ± 2.2°; 135° = 133.4 ± 2.0°; 180° = 179.2 ± 5.9°). All angles displayed excellent reliability (CV < 5%) while greater mean bias (3.6 ± 5.1°, p < 0.001), weaker limits of agreement, and reduced precision were evident for 180° trials when compared with all other angles. High-level accuracy and reliability when detecting COD angles further advocates the use of inertial sensors to quantify sports-specific movement patterns.

DOI

10.1519/JSC.0000000000003064

Share

 
COinS