PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
July 14, 2025Sensors19 citationsOpen Access

Motion Capture Technologies for Athletic Performance Enhancement and Injury Risk Assessment: A Review for Multi-Sport Organizations

View Full Paper
BABahman AdlouCWChristopher WilburnWWWendi H. Weimar

Key Points

  • Motion capture technologies are essential for evaluating athletic performance and assessing injury risks in athletes.
  • Optical systems provide high accuracy in controlled settings, while field conditions affect their performance.
  • Inertial measurement unit systems have varying angular accuracy based on movement complexity, ranging from 2–8°.
  • A new tiered framework is proposed to guide technology selection based on organizational needs and sport-specific requirements.

Abstract

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.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Adlou et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/689a02b6e6551bb0af8cc26fhttps://doi.org/10.3390/s25144384
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Motion Capture Technology in Sports Scenarios: A Survey2024 · 101 citations
  2. 2Next-Generation Low-Cost Motion Capture Systems Can Provide Comparable Spatial Accuracy to High-End Systems2013 · 121 citations
  3. 3Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Different Technologies for Sprint-Derived Horizontal Force-Velocity-Power Profiling2023 · 42 citations
  4. 4DeMoCap: Low-Cost Marker-Based Motion Capture2021 · 42 citations
  5. 5Gender-Based Differences in Biomechanical Walking Patterns of Athletes Using Inertial Sensors2025 · 5 citations