The effect of camera viewing angle on posture assessment repeatability and cumulative spinal loading

Abstract

Video-based task analysis in the workplace is often limited by equipment location and production line arrangement, therefore making it difficult to capture the motion in a single plane. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of camera placement on an observer's ability to accurately assess working postures in three dimensions and the resultant influence on the reliability and repeatability of calculated cumulative loading variables. Four video cameras were placed at viewing angles of 0°, 45°, 60° and 90° to the frontal plane, enabling the simultaneous collection of views of four lifting tasks (two symmetric and two asymmetric). A total of 11 participants were trained in the use of the 3DMatch 3-D posture matching software package (developed at the University of Waterloo) and were required to analyse 16 lifting trials. Four of the participants were randomly selected to return within 72 h and repeat the analysis protocol to test intra-observer repeatability. Posture matching agreement between camera views was higher when the body segments had a minimal range of motion during the task. There was no significant participant main effect; however, there was a significant (p < 0.05) task main effect. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess the between day reliability. Compression, reaction anterior shear and extension moment were all found to have excellent reliability (ICC > 0.75). Joint anterior shear and joint posterior shear both provided fair to good reliability (0.4 > ICC < 0.75). Overall, the impact of the camera viewing angle on an observer's ability to match working postural exposure was found to be small.

Keywords:

• Cumulative loading
• Posture matching
• Video analysis
• Lumbar compression
• 3DMatch
• Reliability

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the AUTO21 Network Centres of Excellence, whose funding is provided by the Canadian Federal Government. The authors would like to thank Kelly VanSlyke for her help during data collection. The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Jim Croll for his statistical consultation.