Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Invasive methods are more reproducible and accurate than non-invasive ones when it comes to recording knee kinematics, but they are usually less accessible and less safe, mainly due to risk of infection. For this reason, non-invasive methods with passive markers are widely used. With these methods, varying marker sets based on a number of single markers, or sets of markers, known as clusters, are used to track body segments. We compared one invasive method--radiostereometric analysis--with a non-invasive method, an optical tracking system with 15 skin-mounted markers. METHODS: 9 subjects (10 knees) were investigated simultaneously with a dynamic RSA system and a motion-capture system while performing an active knee extension. RESULTS: For flexion/extension, there was good agreement on an individual basis and at the group level. For internal/external rotation, the group mean was fairly similar, up to 25 degrees of flexion. Recordings of abductions and/or adductions revealed a systematic mean difference of 2-4 degrees during the range of flexion measured. The correlation between the 2 methods in the horizontal and frontal planes was poor. INTERPRETATION: Our skin-marker model provided reliable data for flexion/extension. Recordings of internal/external rotation and abduction/adduction were less accurate on an individual basis than at the group level, most probably due to soft-tissue motion and the presence of small true motion in these planes.