3D Motionprint FCE Advantage

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.

Feature 3D Motionprint® Traditional FCEs
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.