Cargando…

Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability

The portability of wearable inertial sensors makes them particularly suitable for measuring gait in real-world walking situations. However, it is unclear how well inertial sensors can measure and evaluate gait stability compared to traditional laboratory-based optical motion capture. This study inve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Riek, Paul M., Best, Aaron N., Wu, Amy R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9921478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36772586
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23031547
_version_ 1784887322053967872
author Riek, Paul M.
Best, Aaron N.
Wu, Amy R.
author_facet Riek, Paul M.
Best, Aaron N.
Wu, Amy R.
author_sort Riek, Paul M.
collection PubMed
description The portability of wearable inertial sensors makes them particularly suitable for measuring gait in real-world walking situations. However, it is unclear how well inertial sensors can measure and evaluate gait stability compared to traditional laboratory-based optical motion capture. This study investigated whether an inertial sensor-based motion-capture suit could accurately assess gait stability. Healthy adult participants were asked to walk normally, with eyes closed, with approximately twice their normal step width, and in tandem. Their motion was simultaneously measured by inertial measurement units (IMU) and optical motion capture (Optical). Gait stability was assessed by calculating the margin of stability (MoS), short-term Lyapunov exponents, and step variability, along with basic gait parameters, using each system. We found that IMUs were able to detect the same differences among conditions as Optical for all but one of the measures. Bland–Altman and intraclass correlation (ICC) analysis demonstrated that mediolateral parameters (step width and mediolateral MoS) were measured less accurately by IMUs compared to their anterior-posterior equivalents (step length and anterior-posterior MoS). Our results demonstrate that IMUs can be used to evaluate gait stability through detecting changes in stability-related measures, but that the magnitudes of these measures might not be accurate or reliable, especially in the mediolateral direction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9921478
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99214782023-02-12 Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability Riek, Paul M. Best, Aaron N. Wu, Amy R. Sensors (Basel) Article The portability of wearable inertial sensors makes them particularly suitable for measuring gait in real-world walking situations. However, it is unclear how well inertial sensors can measure and evaluate gait stability compared to traditional laboratory-based optical motion capture. This study investigated whether an inertial sensor-based motion-capture suit could accurately assess gait stability. Healthy adult participants were asked to walk normally, with eyes closed, with approximately twice their normal step width, and in tandem. Their motion was simultaneously measured by inertial measurement units (IMU) and optical motion capture (Optical). Gait stability was assessed by calculating the margin of stability (MoS), short-term Lyapunov exponents, and step variability, along with basic gait parameters, using each system. We found that IMUs were able to detect the same differences among conditions as Optical for all but one of the measures. Bland–Altman and intraclass correlation (ICC) analysis demonstrated that mediolateral parameters (step width and mediolateral MoS) were measured less accurately by IMUs compared to their anterior-posterior equivalents (step length and anterior-posterior MoS). Our results demonstrate that IMUs can be used to evaluate gait stability through detecting changes in stability-related measures, but that the magnitudes of these measures might not be accurate or reliable, especially in the mediolateral direction. MDPI 2023-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9921478/ /pubmed/36772586 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23031547 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Riek, Paul M.
Best, Aaron N.
Wu, Amy R.
Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability
title Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability
title_full Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability
title_fullStr Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability
title_full_unstemmed Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability
title_short Validation of Inertial Sensors to Evaluate Gait Stability
title_sort validation of inertial sensors to evaluate gait stability
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9921478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36772586
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23031547
work_keys_str_mv AT riekpaulm validationofinertialsensorstoevaluategaitstability
AT bestaaronn validationofinertialsensorstoevaluategaitstability
AT wuamyr validationofinertialsensorstoevaluategaitstability