Cargando…
Examination of a foot mounted IMU-based methodology for a running gait assessment
Gait assessment is essential to understand injury prevention mechanisms during running, where high-impact forces can lead to a range of injuries in the lower extremities. Information regarding the running style to increase efficiency and/or selection of the correct running equipment, such as shoe ty...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9485551/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36147582 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2022.956889 |
Sumario: | Gait assessment is essential to understand injury prevention mechanisms during running, where high-impact forces can lead to a range of injuries in the lower extremities. Information regarding the running style to increase efficiency and/or selection of the correct running equipment, such as shoe type, can minimize the risk of injury, e.g., matching a runner's gait to a particular set of cushioning technologies found in modern shoes (neutral/support cushioning). Awareness of training or selection of the correct equipment requires an understanding of a runner's biomechanics, such as determining foot orientation when it strikes the ground. Previous work involved a low-cost approach with a foot-mounted inertial measurement unit (IMU) and an associated zero-crossing-based methodology to objectively understand a runner's biomechanics (in any setting) to learn about shoe selection. Here, an investigation of the previously presented ZC-based methodology is presented only to determine general validity for running gait assessment in a range of running abilities from novice (8 km/h) to experienced (16 km/h+). In comparison to Vicon 3D motion tracking data, the presented approach can extract pronation, foot strike location, and ground contact time with good [ICC((2,1)) > 0.750] to excellent [ICC((2,1)) > 0.900] agreement between 8–12 km/h runs. However, at higher speeds (14 km/h+), the ZC-based approach begins to deteriorate in performance, suggesting that other features and approaches may be more suitable for faster running and sprinting tasks. |
---|