Cargando…

Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables

INTRODUCTION: Pressure-measuring insoles can provide a portable alternative to existing gait analysis tools. However, there is disagreement among researchers on their accuracy and the appropriate calibration methods. The purposes of this study were to (1) determine the validity of pressure-measuring...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: DeBerardinis, Jessica, Dufek, Janet S, Trabia, Mohamed B, Lidstone, Daniel E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6453056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31191923
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2055668317752088
_version_ 1783409371807481856
author DeBerardinis, Jessica
Dufek, Janet S
Trabia, Mohamed B
Lidstone, Daniel E
author_facet DeBerardinis, Jessica
Dufek, Janet S
Trabia, Mohamed B
Lidstone, Daniel E
author_sort DeBerardinis, Jessica
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Pressure-measuring insoles can provide a portable alternative to existing gait analysis tools. However, there is disagreement among researchers on their accuracy and the appropriate calibration methods. The purposes of this study were to (1) determine the validity of pressure-measuring insoles for calculating stance time and support-phase impulse during walking using two calibration procedures, and (2) examine the effect of insole size on the results. METHODS: Data were collected from 39 participants (23.5 ± 3.24 yrs, 66.7 ± 17.5 kg, 1.64 ± 0.09 m), each wearing appropriately sized insoles as they walked over two consecutive force platforms. Two calibration methods were evaluated: (1) manufacturer’s recommendation, and (2) a participant weight-based approach. Qualitative and quantitative evaluations were conducted. RESULTS: The results indicated that the insoles measured longer stance times than the force platform (differences are less than 10%). Both calibration methods resulted in inaccurate impulse values (differences are 30 and 50% for the two calibration methods, respectively). The results showed that when using the first calibration method, impulse values depended on insole size. The second calibration consistently underestimated the impulse. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that while the insoles provide acceptable qualitative representation of the gait, the two studied calibration methods may lead to a misleading quantitative assessment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6453056
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64530562019-06-12 Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables DeBerardinis, Jessica Dufek, Janet S Trabia, Mohamed B Lidstone, Daniel E J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng Special Collection: Wearable Technologies for Active Living and Rehabilitation INTRODUCTION: Pressure-measuring insoles can provide a portable alternative to existing gait analysis tools. However, there is disagreement among researchers on their accuracy and the appropriate calibration methods. The purposes of this study were to (1) determine the validity of pressure-measuring insoles for calculating stance time and support-phase impulse during walking using two calibration procedures, and (2) examine the effect of insole size on the results. METHODS: Data were collected from 39 participants (23.5 ± 3.24 yrs, 66.7 ± 17.5 kg, 1.64 ± 0.09 m), each wearing appropriately sized insoles as they walked over two consecutive force platforms. Two calibration methods were evaluated: (1) manufacturer’s recommendation, and (2) a participant weight-based approach. Qualitative and quantitative evaluations were conducted. RESULTS: The results indicated that the insoles measured longer stance times than the force platform (differences are less than 10%). Both calibration methods resulted in inaccurate impulse values (differences are 30 and 50% for the two calibration methods, respectively). The results showed that when using the first calibration method, impulse values depended on insole size. The second calibration consistently underestimated the impulse. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that while the insoles provide acceptable qualitative representation of the gait, the two studied calibration methods may lead to a misleading quantitative assessment. SAGE Publications 2018-01-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6453056/ /pubmed/31191923 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2055668317752088 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Special Collection: Wearable Technologies for Active Living and Rehabilitation
DeBerardinis, Jessica
Dufek, Janet S
Trabia, Mohamed B
Lidstone, Daniel E
Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables
title Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables
title_full Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables
title_fullStr Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables
title_short Assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables
title_sort assessing the validity of pressure-measuring insoles in quantifying gait variables
topic Special Collection: Wearable Technologies for Active Living and Rehabilitation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6453056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31191923
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2055668317752088
work_keys_str_mv AT deberardinisjessica assessingthevalidityofpressuremeasuringinsolesinquantifyinggaitvariables
AT dufekjanets assessingthevalidityofpressuremeasuringinsolesinquantifyinggaitvariables
AT trabiamohamedb assessingthevalidityofpressuremeasuringinsolesinquantifyinggaitvariables
AT lidstonedaniele assessingthevalidityofpressuremeasuringinsolesinquantifyinggaitvariables