Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChromý, Adamcs
dc.contributor.authorŽalud, Luděkcs
dc.contributor.authorDobšák, Petrcs
dc.contributor.authorSuškevič, Igorcs
dc.contributor.authorMrkvicová, Veronikacs
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-04T11:04:25Z
dc.date.available2020-08-04T11:04:25Z
dc.date.issued2015-11-19cs
dc.identifier.citationSpringerPlus. 2015, vol. 4, issue 707, p. 1-15.en
dc.identifier.issn2193-1801cs
dc.identifier.other126083cs
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11012/61756
dc.description.abstractLimb volume measurements are used for evaluating growth of muscle mass and effectivity of strength training. Beside sport sciences, it is used e.g. for detection of oedemas, lymphedemas or carcinomas or for examinations of muscle atrophy. There are several commonly used methods, but there is a lack of clear comparison, which shows their advantages and limits. The accuracy of each method is uncertainly estimated only. The aim of this paper is to determine and experimentally verify their accuracy and compare them among each other. Water Displacement Method (WD), three methods based on circumferential measures—Frustum Sign Model (FSM), Disc Model (DM), Partial Frustum Model (PFM) and two 3D scan based methods Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) were compared. Precise reference cylinders and limbs of two human subjects were measured 10 times by each method. Personal dependency of methods was also tested by measuring 10 times the same object by 3 different people. Accuracies: WD 0.3 %, FSM 2–8 % according person, DM, PFM 1–8 %, MRI 2 % (hand) or 8 % (finger), CT 0.5 % (hand) or 2 % (finger);times: FSM 1 min, CT 7 min, WD, DM, PFM 15 min, MRI 19 min; and more. WD was found as the best method for most of uses with best accuracy. The CT disposes with almost the same accuracy and allows measurements of specific regions (e.g. particular muscles), as same as MRI, which accuracy is worse though, but it is not harmful. Frustum Sign Model is usable for very fast estimation of limb volume, but with lower accuracy, Disc Model and Partial Frustum Model is useful in cases when Water Displacement cannot be used.en
dc.formattextcs
dc.format.extent1-15cs
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfcs
dc.language.isoencs
dc.publisherSpringercs
dc.relation.ispartofSpringerPluscs
dc.relation.urihttp://springerplus.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40064-015-1468-7cs
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 Internationalcs
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/cs
dc.subjectVolumetric measurementsen
dc.subjectVolumetric methodsen
dc.subjectBody volumeen
dc.titleLimb volume measurements: comparison of accuracy and decisive parameters of the most used present methodsen
thesis.grantorVysoké učení technické v Brně. Středoevropský technologický institut VUT. Kybernetika pro materiálové vědycs
thesis.grantorVysoké učení technické v Brně. Fakulta elektrotechniky a komunikačních technologií. Ústav automatizace a měřicí technikycs
sync.item.dbidVAV-126083en
sync.item.dbtypeVAVen
sync.item.insts2020.08.04 13:04:25en
sync.item.modts2020.08.04 12:24:10en
dc.coverage.issue707cs
dc.coverage.volume4cs
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s40064-015-1468-7cs
dc.rights.accessopenAccesscs
dc.rights.sherpahttp://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/issn/2193-1801/cs
dc.type.driverarticleen
dc.type.statusPeer-revieweden
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International