MB

M.A.M. Berger

info

Please Note

6 records found

Journal article (2026) - R.M.A. van der Slikke, Viola C. Altmann, Mariska M.H.P. Janssen, M.A.M. Berger
Field-based performance and skill tests are widely used in wheelchair rugby (WR) to assess physical capacity, yet their relation to in-game mobility and potential differences between athletes with and without coordination impairment (CI) remain unclear. This study examined (1) ecological validity and test-match correspondence of a comprehensive WR field-test battery, reflecting maximal capacity, against match-derived mobility performance, (2) impairment-based differences in test-match agreement, and (3) trunk-movement differences between CI and Non-CI athletes. Fifty-two international WR athletes (Non-CI: n = 27; CI: n = 25) completed a standardized battery (sprint, turning, stop-go, complex skills) with wheel- and trunk-mounted inertial sensors. Match metrics (e.g., average/maximal speed, rotational speed) were derived from full-match IMU data. Test-match correspondence was assessed using Pearson correlations and Lin's concordance; agreement with Bland–Altman analysis; group differences with Welch's t-tests (FDR/Holm corrected). Trunk angle and trunk-relative accelerations were analyzed separately, with classification included in supplementary analyses. Maximal forward speed showed strong association (20 m sprint: r = 0.878, small bias), and rotational capacity was best captured by an isolated 180° turn (r = 0.796). Acceleration metrics showed moderate correlations but poor absolute agreement, indicating they reflect maximal capacity rather than match-equivalent output. CI athletes showed smaller test-match discrepancies, whereas Non-CI athletes’ tests tended to underestimate match speed and overestimate acceleration. Trunk-sensor outcomes differed strongly between groups (g ≈ 0.9–1.2), indicating substantial impairment-related variation. Classification correlated positively with performance, with similar strength across groups. Linear sprint and isolated turning tests show strong associations with in-game WR performance, while acceleration metrics mainly index maximal capacity. Field tests appear to align more closely with match behavior in CI athletes than in Non-CI athletes. Trunk-sensor measures add value for profiling and may support future classification. ...
Journal article (2024) - Marit P. van Dijk, Marco J.M. Hoozemans, Monique A.M. Berger, Dirk Jan H.E.J. Veeger
In wheelchair sports, there is an increasing need to monitor mechanical power in the field. When rolling resistance is known, inertial measurement units (IMUs) can be used to determine mechanical power. However, upper body (i.e., trunk) motion affects the mass distribution between the small front and large rear wheels, thus affecting rolling resistance. Therefore, drag tests – which are commonly used to estimate rolling resistance – may not be valid. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of trunk motion on mechanical power estimates in hand-rim wheelchair propulsion by comparing instantaneous resistance-based power loss with drag test-based power loss. Experiments were performed with no, moderate and full trunk motion during wheelchair propulsion. During these experiments, power loss was determined based on 1) the instantaneous rolling resistance and 2) based on the rolling resistance determined from drag tests (thus neglecting the effects of trunk motion). Results showed that power loss values of the two methods were similar when no trunk motion was present (mean difference [MD] of 0.6 ± 1.6 %). However, drag test-based power loss was underestimated up to −3.3 ± 2.3 % MD when the extent of trunk motion increased (r = 0.85). To conclude, during wheelchair propulsion with active trunk motion, neglecting the effects of trunk motion leads to an underestimated mechanical power of 1 to 6 % when it is estimated with drag test values. Depending on the required accuracy and the amount of trunk motion in the target group, the influence of trunk motion on power estimates should be corrected for. ...

Wheelchair Sports and Data Science Push It to the Limit

Conference paper (2024) - Riemer J.K. Vegter, Marit P. van Dijk, Dirkjan H.E.J. Veeger, Luc H.V. van der Woude, Rienk M.A. van der Slikke, Rowie J.F. Janssen, Marco J.M. Hoozemans, Han J.H.P. Houdijk, Monique A.M. Berger, Sonja de Groot
Paralympic wheelchair athletes solely depend on the power of their upper-body for their on- court wheeled mobility as well as for performing sport-specific actions in ball sports, like a basketball shot or a tennis serve. The objective of WheelPower is to improve the power output of athletes in their sport-specific wheelchair to perform better in competition. To achieve this objective the current project systematically combines the three Dutch measurement innovations (WMPM, Esseda wheelchair ergometer, PitchPerfect system) to monitor a large population of athletes from different wheelchair sports resulting in optimal power production by wheelchair athletes during competition. The data will be directly implemented in feedback tools accessible to athletes, trainers and coaches which gives them the unique opportunity to adapt their training and wheelchair settings for optimal performance. Hence, the current consortium facilitates mass and focus by uniting scientists and all major Paralympic wheelchair sports to monitor the power output of many wheelchair athletes under field and lab conditions, which will be assisted by the best data science approach to this challenge. ...

Monitoring mechanical power output during wheelchair field and court sports using inertial measurement units

Journal article (2024) - Marit P. van Dijk, Marco J.M. Hoozemans, Monique A.M. Berger, H. E.J. Veeger
An important performance determinant in wheelchair sports is the power exchanged between the athlete-wheelchair combination and the environment, in short, mechanical power. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) might be used to estimate the exchanged mechanical power during wheelchair sports practice. However, to validly apply IMUs for mechanical power assessment in wheelchair sports, a well-founded and unambiguous theoretical framework is required that follows the dynamics of manual wheelchair propulsion. Therefore, this research has two goals. First, to present a theoretical framework that supports the use of IMUs to estimate power output via power balance equations. Second, to demonstrate the use of the IMU-based power estimates during wheelchair propulsion based on experimental data. Mechanical power during straight-line wheelchair propulsion on a treadmill was estimated using a wheel mounted IMU and was subsequently compared to optical motion capture data serving as a reference. IMU-based power was calculated from rolling resistance (estimated from drag tests) and change in kinetic energy (estimated using wheelchair velocity and wheelchair acceleration). The results reveal no significant difference between reference power values and the proposed IMU-based power (1.8% mean difference, N.S.). As the estimated rolling resistance shows a 0.9–1.7% underestimation, over time, IMU-based power will be slightly underestimated as well. To conclude, the theoretical framework and the resulting IMU model seems to provide acceptable estimates of mechanical power during straight-line wheelchair propulsion in wheelchair (sports) practice, and it is an important first step towards feasible power estimations in all wheelchair sports situations. ...

Validation of a Machine Learning Method for Detection of Wheelchair Propulsion Type

Journal article (2024) - Rienk van der Slikke, Arie-Willem de Leeuw, Aleid de Rooij, Monique Berger
Within rehabilitation, there is a great need for a simple method to monitor wheelchair use, especially whether it is active or passive. For this purpose, an existing measurement technique was extended with a method for detecting self- or attendant-pushed wheelchair propulsion. The aim of this study was to validate this new detection method by comparison with manual annotation of wheelchair use. Twenty-four amputation and stroke patients completed a semi-structured course of active and passive wheelchair use. Based on a machine learning approach, a method was developed that detected the type of movement. The machine learning method was trained based on the data of a single-wheel sensor as well as a setup using an additional sensor on the frame. The method showed high accuracy (F1 = 0.886, frame and wheel sensor) even if only a single wheel sensor was used (F1 = 0.827). The developed and validated measurement method is ideally suited to easily determine wheelchair use and the corresponding activity level of patients in rehabilitation. ...

Estimating intra-cycle load distribution between front and rear wheels during wheelchair propulsion from inertial sensors

Journal article (2024) - Marit P. van Dijk, Louise I. Heringa, Monique A.M. Berger, Marco J.M. Hoozemans, H.E.J. Veeger
Accurate assessment of rolling resistance is important for wheelchair propulsion analyses. However, the commonly used drag and deceleration tests are reported to underestimate rolling resistance up to 6% due to the (neglected) influence of trunk motion. The first aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of using trunk and wheelchair kinematics to predict the intra-cyclical load distribution, more particularly front wheel loading, during hand-rim wheelchair propulsion. Secondly, the study compared the accuracy of rolling resistance determined from the predicted load distribution with the accuracy of drag test-based rolling resistance. Twenty-five able-bodied participants performed hand-rim wheelchair propulsion on a large motor-driven treadmill. During the treadmill sessions, front wheel load was assessed with load pins to determine the load distribution between the front and rear wheels. Accordingly, a machine learning model was trained to predict front wheel load from kinematic data. Based on two inertial sensors (attached to the trunk and wheelchair) and the machine learning model, front wheel load was predicted with a mean absolute error (MAE) of 3.8% (or 1.8 kg). Rolling resistance determined from the predicted load distribution (MAE: 0.9%, mean error (ME): 0.1%) was more accurate than drag test-based rolling resistance (MAE: 2.5%, ME: −1.3%). ...