Vibration arthrometry: a critical review

The clinical value of sounds and vibrations produced by biological joints in motion has been studied extensively since 1902, aimed at developing a technology to aid the interpretation of recorded joint vibration signals. Such technology would have clear advantages to current medical imaging systems,...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Critical reviews in biomedical engineering Vol. 41; no. 3; p. 223
Main Authors:	Abbott, Steven C, Cole, Michael D
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	United States 2013
Subjects:	Auscultation - history Auscultation - methods Biomechanical Phenomena Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted Finger Joint - pathology Hip Joint - pathology History, 20th Century History, 21st Century Humans Kinetics Knee Joint - pathology Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Motion Muscle Strength Dynamometer Osteoarthritis - pathology Shoulder Joint - pathology Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted Vibration
Online Access:	Get more information
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	The clinical value of sounds and vibrations produced by biological joints in motion has been studied extensively since 1902, aimed at developing a technology to aid the interpretation of recorded joint vibration signals. Such technology would have clear advantages to current medical imaging systems, e.g. MRI, in speed, cost, and non-invasiveness. However, it has yet to achieve routine clinical use. This review aims to provide a balanced analysis of past and present attempts to progress vibration arthrometry. The literature reveals significant barriers to successful implementation of vibration arthrometry. From a technical standpoint, accounting for the intense variability within recorded signals caused by shifting characteristics of contacting joint surfaces and forces during motion is the primary issue. Additionally, understandable scepticism in the clinical community as to the reliability of vibration arthrometry represents a significant barrier to adoption. In conclusion, until the variability issue is shown to be adequately dealt with, and clear transparent evidence of clinical usefulness to orthopedic medicine demonstrated, it will be difficult to move the field forward. Future work should lead toward proving value to clinicians, and be transparent about how the variability issue has been resolved.
ISSN:	0278-940X
DOI:	10.1615/CritRevBiomedEng.2014010061