You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Sensors
  • This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
  • Article
  • Open Access

7 November 2025

Assessment of Elbow Proprioception with Inertial Measurement Units—Validity and Reliability Study

,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Rehasport Clinic, 60-201 Poznan, Poland
2
Sport Trauma and Biomechanics Unit, Department of Orthopaedics, Traumatology and Hand Surgery Department, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 61-545 Poznan, Poland
3
RSQ Technologies, 61-737 Poznan, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Section Sensors Development

Abstract

Background: Inertial measurement units (IMUs) represent a relatively new and promising method for motion analysis. Their main advantages include small size and portability, combined with the use of advanced technologies. To date, few studies have investigated the application of these devices for proprioception assessment, and none have focused specifically on the elbow joint. Therefore, the aim of our study was to assess reliability and validate the protocol of elbow proprioception evaluation using inertial motion sensors. Methods: Twenty healthy participants underwent active and passive proprioception assessments based on joint position sense (JPS). Two researchers independently performed evaluation. The analyzed data was the error of reproduction of joint position (ERJP). IMU (RSQ Motion sensors) were used for angular joint position assessment and validated against Biodex System 4. Results: Inter-rater reliability for passive proprioception was good, with a Kendall’s coefficient of 0.77 (p < 0.05) for both RSQ Motion sensors and BIODEX, while active proprioception measured with RSQ Motion sensors showed slightly lower reliability (Kendall’s coefficient of 0.66, p < 0.05). Intra-rater reliability had similar results, with Kendall’s coefficients of 0.74 for passive BIODEX proprioception examination, 0.75 for passive RSQ Motion sensor testing and 0.65 for active proprioception (p < 0.05) measured with RSQ Motion sensors. The Bland–Altman plot revealed an equal distribution of results, which were within the limits of agreement (LoA). Conclusions: These results suggest proprioception assessment by JPS using inertial motion sensors is reliable and valid. It is an easy to use, light, portable, and inexpensive alternative for proprioception assessment, although further research in diverse clinical settings is needed.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.