Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2025 Jul 13;25(14):4384.
doi: 10.3390/s25144384.

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

Affiliations
Review

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

Bahman Adlou et al. Sensors (Basel). .

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.

Keywords: IMU; MoCap; athlete monitoring; biomechanics; ecological validity; implementation framework; kinematic analysis; markerless; sports science; validation studies; wearable sensors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Needham L., Evans M., Cosker D.P., Colyer S.L. Development, Evaluation and Application of a Novel Markerless Motion Analysis System to Understand Push-Start Technique in Elite Skeleton Athletes. PLoS ONE. 2021;16:e0259624. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259624. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tomar R. The Role of Biomechanics in Enhancing Athletic Performance. J. Res. Appl. Sci. Biotechnol. 2022;1:225–231. doi: 10.55544/jrasb.1.5.26. - DOI
    1. Aresta S., Musci M., Bottiglione F., Moretti L., Moretti B., Bortone I. Motion Technologies in Support of Fence Athletes: A Systematic Review. Appl. Sci. 2023;13:1654. doi: 10.3390/app13031654. - DOI
    1. Taborri J., Keogh J., Kos A., Santuz A., Umek A., Urbanczyk C., van der Kruk E., Rossi S. Sport Biomechanics Applications Using Inertial, Force, and EMG Sensors: A Literature Overview. Appl. Bionics Biomech. 2020;2020:2041549. doi: 10.1155/2020/2041549. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Suo X., Tang W., Li Z. Motion Capture Technology in Sports Scenarios: A Survey. Sensors. 2024;24:2947. doi: 10.3390/s24092947. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources