Bumping Elbows explores a workflow integrating 3D body scanning technology with robotic knitting to create personalized garments. Traditional 3D knitting development relies on 2D drafts and panels, rooted in industrial flatbed knitting practices. Our approach leverages accurate topology measurements from 3D body scans to directly inform garment design and production, allowing for custom fits to unique body shapes. We will demonstrate this process through live 3D scanning and software demonstrations, highlighting the challenges and opportunities integrating body scans and knitting techniques like goring. Our included software addresses limitations of previous work and outlines advancements needed for broader research adoption, emphasizing the potential of combining 3D scanning with robotic knitting. This method offers enhanced personalization and sustainability in garment production, showcasing the ongoing challenges and advancements in achieving precision in robotic knitting.
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of (new) treatments or analyse prevalence and risk factors of contractures, rating scales are used based on joint range of motion. However, cut-off points for levels of severity vary between scales, and it seems unclear how cut-off points relate to function. The purpose of this study was to compare severity ratings of different rating scales for the shoulder and elbow and relate these with functional range of motion.METHODS: Often used contracture severity rating scales in orthopedics, physiotherapy, and burns were included. Functional range of motion angles for the shoulder and elbow were derived from a recent synthesis published by our group. Shoulder flexion and elbow flexion range of motion data of patients three months after a burn injury were rated with each of the scales to illustrate the effects of differences in classifications. Secondly, the shoulder and elbow flexion range of motion angles were related to the required angles to perform over 50 different activities of daily living tasks.RESULTS: Eighteen rating scales were included (shoulder: 6, elbow: 12). Large differences in the number of severity levels and the cut-off points between scales were determined. Rating the measured range of motions with the different scales showed substantial inconsistency in the number of joints without impairment (shoulder: 14-36%, elbow: 26-100%) or with severe impairment (shoulder: < 10%-29%, elbow 0%-17%). Cut-off points of most scales were not related to actual function in daily living.CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for rating scales that express the severity of contractures in terms of loss of functionality. This study proposes a direction for a solution.
Objective Primary to provide an overview of diagnostic accuracy for clinical tests for common elbow (sport) injuries, secondary accompanied by reproducible instructions to perform these tests. Design A systematic literature review according to the PRISMA statement. Data sources A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE via PubMed and EMBASE. Eligibility criteria We included studies reporting diagnostic accuracy and a description on the performance for elbow tests, targeting the following conditions: distal biceps rupture, triceps rupture, posteromedial impingement, medial collateral ligament (MCL) insufficiency, posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI), lateral epicondylitis and medial epicondylitis. After identifying the articles, the methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. Results Our primary literature search yielded 1144 hits. After assessment 10 articles were included: six for distal biceps rupture, one for MCL insufficiency, two for PLRI and one for lateral epicondylitis. No articles were selected for triceps rupture, posteromedial impingement and medial epicondylitis. Quality assessment showed high or unclear risk of bias in nine studies. We described 24 test procedures of which 14 tests contained data on diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions Numerous clinical tests for the elbow were described in literature, seldom accompanied with data on diagnostic accuracy. None of the described tests can provide adequate certainty to rule in or rule out a disease based on sufficient diagnostic accuracy.
LINK
