Background: Motion capture (MoCap) technologies have transformed athlete monitoring, yet athletic departments face complex decisions when selecting systems for multiple sports. Methods: We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed studies (2015–2025) examining optical marker-based, inertial measurement unit (IMU) systems, including Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)-integrated systems, and markerless computer vision systems. Studies were evaluated for validated accuracy metrics across indoor court, aquatic, and outdoor field environments. Results: Optical systems maintain sub-millimeter accuracy in controlled environments but face field limitations. IMU systems demonstrate an angular accuracy of 2–8° depending on movement complexity. Markerless systems show variable accuracy (sagittal: 3–15°, transverse: 3–57°). Environmental factors substantially impact system performance, with aquatic settings introducing an additional orientation error of 2° versus terrestrial applications. Outdoor environments challenge GNSS-based tracking (±0.3–3 m positional accuracy). Critical gaps include limited gender-specific validation and insufficient long-term reliability data. Conclusions: This review proposes a tiered implementation framework combining foundation-level team monitoring with specialized assessment tools. This evidence-based approach guides the selection of technology aligned with organizational priorities, sport-specific requirements, and resource constraints.
Adlou et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: