背景與目的：動作捕捉裝置已被廣泛應用於臨床實驗以評估步態參數，步態分析可用在分析動作型態與運動能力，進而協助判斷傷害機轉，在物理治療之評估及預後扮演重要角色。然而，市面上有許多動作捕捉裝置，例如：光學系統（optical system）、非光學系統（non-optical system）與無標記系統（markerless system），臨床物理治療師要如何選擇適合的裝置用於臨床步態分析呢？本篇文獻回顧旨在統整近5年之文獻，探討不同動作捕捉裝置應用在臨床或實驗步態分析之優缺點，提供實證資料作為裝置選擇之參考依據。方法：本文獻回顧依照PRISMA Guideline，使用PubMed、MEDLINE與Embase資料庫搜尋相關文獻，關鍵字為：步態分析（gait analysis）、行走（walking）、動作捕捉（motion capture）、穿戴式感測器（wearable sensors）、無標記系統（markerless system），搜尋2016～2021年符合條件之相關文獻。由上述關鍵字搜尋之文獻依據以下標準納入：（1）用於動作捕捉並進行步態分析的裝置；（2）以中英文發表之文獻；（3）使用的設備和方法符合技術規範。結果：本文獻回顧共選取9篇文獻，（1）光學系統擁有高度的信效度，被視為目前應用於步態分析之黃金標準；（2）非光學系統中，慣性感測單元為近5年多數臨床或研究實驗使用，其信效度和黃金標準有高度一致性；（3）無標記系統為三者中最平價且無須放置任何裝置於受測者肢段，但在膝關節和踝關節之信效度仍需更多實驗證實。結論與臨床意義：本文獻回顧涵蓋近5年臨床或研究上最常用於步態分析的三大種類裝置之優缺點，結果顯示，非光學系統是目前應用於臨床或實驗之步態分析中較常被建議使用的裝置。但是在選擇動作捕捉裝置時，仍建議參考環境限制、預算限制與動作複雜度等面向，以選擇最適合的評估測量裝置。

Background and Purpose: Motion capture devices have been widely used for clinical assessment and laboratory experiments to analyze the gait pattern. Gait analysis plays a critical role in detecting the movement pattern or exercise ability to prevent further injuries. Nevertheless, there were so many motion capture systems on the market which include optical systems, non-optical systems, and markerless systems. And how should physiotherapists choose the suitable device for clinical gait analysis? The purpose of this study was to review the pros and cons of motion capture devices for gait analysis in clinics and laboratories over the last 5 years. Methods: This systemic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. Our study reviewed the potentially relevant articles by searching keywords “gait analysis,” “walking,” “motion capture,” “wearable sensors,” and “markerless system” in PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases. This review included articles published from 2016 to 2021 with the following inclusion criteria: (1) used motion capture devices for gait analysis; (2) published in English or Chinese; and (3) reported full compliance with the technical specifications of motion capture devices. Results: A total of 9 articles were included in this systematic review. The optical system had the highest reliability and validity, and it was suggested as the gold standard for gait analysis. For non-optical system, the inertial measurement unit has been recommended as the most popular motion capture device for gait analysis in recent years, highly correlated with the gold standard. Meanwhile, the markerless system was the least expensive and did not require subjects to wear the device. However, our results suggested that the reliability of the markerless system was lacking during walking, especially at the knee and ankle joints. Conclusion: This systematic review provided the advantages and disadvantages of three types of motion capture devices for gait analysis. The findings indicated that the non-optical systems of motion capture devices were the most recommended for gait analysis in clinics and laboratories. However, motion complexity, environmental constraints, and financial limitations should be considered when choosing motion capture devices.