BioMotion is innovating Functional Evaluations by incorporating state-of-the-art motion analysis technologies to quantify and analyze human movement and exertion to provide a comprehensive, objective and reliable measurement of a claimants true physical abilities. The table below provides a brief summary of key advantages of 3D Motionprint® Functional Imaging.
|Accurately quantify full 3D range of movement and gait (ability to stand, walk, move and work in various postures on the job).
||High accuracy measurement and assessment of gait, movement and postural abilities with objective indicators of subject reliability.
- Gait temporal/spatial measurements quantify pace, stride length, single and double limb support phases and swing phase for each leg.
- Comparisons to both population norms and injured vs. uninjured side provide true representation of residual ability/deficit.
- Quantification of all extremity joint movements and trunk orientation during typical job-related ambulatory and postural activities allows for:
- Determination of root cause of musculoskeletal disorders
- Objective impact of those disorders on functional abilities.
- Reliability of performance determined through an objective comparison of repeated, measured activities, including both distraction techniques and variation in the sequencing of component motions.
- Movement and postural activities are typically observed, with determination of “able” or “not able” left to examiner judgment.
- Some protocols time movement activities to quantify level of performance.
- Shows impact of disorder on rate of activity, but not on musculoskeletal function or dysfunction.
- No information relating to root cause of injury or disorder.
- No comparison of injured vs. uninjured sides, or potential risk factors from modified mechanics.
- Only manual (static) measurement of individual joint movement – no objective correlation to abilities.
- No objective method to assess subject reliability of movement.
|Safely and reliably assess strength in typical work activities.
||Synchronized whole-body static strength assessment simultaneously measures body postures, loads, exerted strength and consistency of effort.
- Research-based isometric strength protocols are documented to be both safe and accurate for determination of maximal effort.
- Objective assessment of subject reliability achieved through a unique process of repetition with postural and mechanical variation to detect managed effort.
- The only functional evaluation that can assess true dynamic body loading during exertion by the use of synchronized motion capture with measurement of foot (and hand) contact forces.
- Strength activities are typically observed with subjects lifting progressively weighted containers.
- Fatigue and risk increase with multiple trials of added weight.
- Subject or examiner often stop test due to stability or safety issues prior to maximal effort.
- No objective reliability criteria.
- Some protocols measure isometric resistance at hands.
- No information on consistency of body posture – only consistency of force at hands.
- No information on mechanical compensatory strategies resulting from injury.
- No information on body loading.
|Assess balance for prolonged standing, walking or working on uneven surfaces, climbing and working in confined areas.
||Dynamic, synchronized force platform and 3D body mechanics measurements to quantify balance ability with one or two leg support. Identify workplace risks and screen for musculoskeletal or neurological deficiencies.
||Balance may be observed, but seldom directly measured. Difficult to establish an ability level or to assess degree of risk or possible source of balance deficiency.
|Quantify upper extremity function.
- Grip and pinch strength testing with comparison to population norms, and determination of reliability of effort.
- Standard coarse and fine motor dexterity tests with comparisons to population norms.
- 3D motion analysis for quantification of dynamic reaching and other motor activities.
- Objective determination of timing, distance and angle of reach for both standard and customized activities.
- Subject reliability assessed through repetition with postural and mechanical variation to detect managed effort.
- Only assessment method that can identify and objectively document compensatory movement strategies.
- Similar grip, pinch and dexterity testing.
- Reaching and other motor activities are typically observed, with determination of “able” or “not able” left to examiner judgment.
- A few protocols quantify abilities by timing movement activities.
- No ability to determine consistency of either distance or angle of movement.
- Reliability only based on variation in timing, not movement.
- No information relating to changes in mechanics due to injury.