Between Dec 19, 2024 and Jan 2, 2025, datasets can be submitted to DRUM but will not be processed until after the break. Staff will not be available to answer email during this period, and will not be able to provide DOIs until after Jan 2. If you are in need of a DOI during this period, consider Dryad or OpenICPSR. Submission responses to the UDC may also be delayed during this time.
 

A Comparison and Validation of Traditional and Three-Dimensional Anthropometric Methods for Measuring the Hand through Reliability, Precision, and Visual Analysis

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Persistent link to this item

Statistics
View Statistics

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Title

A Comparison and Validation of Traditional and Three-Dimensional Anthropometric Methods for Measuring the Hand through Reliability, Precision, and Visual Analysis

Published Date

2020-12

Publisher

Type

Thesis or Dissertation

Abstract

This study examines the reliability and precision of three (3) different tools for collecting anthropometric data of the hand, traditional anthropometric tools (caliper and tape measure) and two (2) full-color hand-held three-dimensional scanners (Occipital Structure Sensor and Artec Leo). A visual analysis of the three-dimensional models provided from the two (2) full-color hand-held three-dimensional scanners (Occipital Structure Sensor and Artec Leo) took place during the post-processing stage to determine the three-dimensional visual reliability and precision. Twelve (12) three-dimensional hand scans, from a more extensive database taken by the Human Dimensioning Lab at the University of Minnesota, were three-dimensionally printed. Eight (8) defined measurements were analyzed for Anthropometric Tool Reliability Analysis and Anthropometric Tool Precision Analysis. This study found that the Artec Leo scanner was more reliable than traditional methods (caliper and tape measure) and the Occipital Structure Sensor. The Occipital Structure Sensor was more reliable than traditional methods (caliper and tape measure) and less reliable than the Occipital Structure Sensor. Within the Anthropometric Tool Precision Analysis, the Artec Leo captured comparable measurements to those collected using traditional methods (caliper and tape measure). The Occipital Structure Sensor captured comparable measurements, except for Index Finger Length and Index Finger Circumference at the Distal Interphalangeal Joint measurements compared to traditional methods (caliper and tape measure) and the Artec Leo. The Anthropometric Tool Precision Analysis included independent identification of landmarks at Fingertips of Digit 2 and 3 for six (6) out of twelve (12) Occipital Structure scans, which impacted two (2) measurements, Hand Length and Index Finger Length. Due to this, a Secondary Anthropometric Tool Precision Analysis took place for the six (6) participants with complete landmarks. During the Secondary Anthropometric Tool Precision Analysis, no statistical significance was found when comparing scans that did not require independent landmark identification. The scans provided by the two (2) three-dimensional scanners (the Occipital Structure Sensor and Artec Leo) were analyzed during the post-processing stage for the Three-Dimensional Visual Reliability Analysis and Three-Dimensional Visual Precision Analysis using a Post-Processing Visual Analysis Likert Scale (Juhnke, Pokorny, and Griffin, 2021). Three-Dimensional Visual Reliability and the Three-Dimensional Visual Precision Analysis found that the Occipital Structure Sensor and Artec Leo are comparable for all locations, except for the Visibility of Landmark location. This study validates the Artec Leo for use in further anthropometric data collection for the hand. The results provided by the Occipital Structure Sensor were promising compared to those collected using traditional methods (caliper and tape measure) when visible landmarking is used. The use of visual analysis as a form of evaluation for the validation of three-dimensional scanners was crucial to understanding where the scan’s quality might affect the data collection outcomes and should be considered within future studies.

Description

University of Minnesota M.S. thesis. December 2020. Major: Design, Housing and Apparel. Advisor: Linsey Griffin. 1 computer file (PDF); x, 93 pages.

Related to

Replaces

License

Series/Report Number

Funding information

Isbn identifier

Doi identifier

Previously Published Citation

Other identifiers

Suggested citation

Seifert, Emily. (2020). A Comparison and Validation of Traditional and Three-Dimensional Anthropometric Methods for Measuring the Hand through Reliability, Precision, and Visual Analysis. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/219394.

Content distributed via the University Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor. By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. Materials in the UDC may contain content that is disturbing and/or harmful. For more information, please see our statement on harmful content in digital repositories.