Cargando…

Assessing the concurrent validity of a gait analysis system integrated into a smart walker in older adults with gait impairments

OBJECTIVE: To assess the concurrent validity of a smart walker–integrated gait analysis system with the GAITRite(®) system for measuring spatiotemporal gait parameters in potential users of the smart walker. DESIGN: Criterion standard validation study. SETTING: Research laboratory in a geriatric hos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Werner, Christian, Chalvatzaki, Georgia, Papageorgiou, Xanthi S, Tzafestas, Costas S, Bauer, Jürgen M, Hauer, Klaus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6745611/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31131630
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0269215519852143
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To assess the concurrent validity of a smart walker–integrated gait analysis system with the GAITRite(®) system for measuring spatiotemporal gait parameters in potential users of the smart walker. DESIGN: Criterion standard validation study. SETTING: Research laboratory in a geriatric hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five older adults (⩾65 years) with gait impairments (habitual rollator use and/or gait speed <0.6 m/s) and no severe cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Examination ⩾17). MAIN MEASURES: Stride, swing and stance time; stride length; and gait speed were simultaneously recorded using the smart walker–integrated gait analysis system and the GAITRite system while participants walked along a 7.8-m walkway with the smart walker. Concurrent criterion-related validity was assessed using the Bland–Altman method, percentage errors (acceptable if <30%), and intraclass correlation coefficients for consistency (ICC(3,1)) and absolute agreement (ICC(2,1)). RESULTS: Bias for stride, swing and stance time ranged from −0.04 to 0.04 seconds, with acceptable percentage errors (8.7%–23.0%). Stride length and gait speed showed higher bias (mean(bias) (SD) = 0.20 (0.11) m; 0.19 (0.13) m/s) and not acceptable percentage errors (31.3%–42.3%). Limits of agreement were considerably narrower for temporal than for spatial-related gait parameters. All gait parameters showed good-to-excellent consistency (ICC(3,1) = 0.72–0.97). Absolute agreement was good-to-excellent for temporal (ICC(2,1) = 0.72–0.97) but only poor-to-fair for spatial-related gait parameters (ICC(2,1) = 0.37–0.52). CONCLUSION: The smart walker–integrated gait analysis system has good concurrent validity with the GAITRite system for measuring temporal but not spatial-related gait parameters in potential end-users of the smart walker. Stride length and gait speed can be measured with good consistency, but with only limited absolute accuracy.