Literature DB >> 27131180

Validity and repeatability of three in-shoe pressure measurement systems.

Carina Price1, Daniel Parker2, Christopher Nester2.   

Abstract

In-shoe pressure measurement devices are used in research and clinic to quantify plantar foot pressures. Various devices are available, differing in size, sensor number and type; therefore accuracy and repeatability. Three devices (Medilogic, Tekscan and Pedar) were examined in a 2 day×3 trial design, quantifying insole response to regional and whole insole loading. The whole insole protocol applied an even pressure (50-600kPa) to the insole surface for 0-30s in the Novel TruBlue™ device. The regional protocol utilised cylinders with contact surfaces of 3.14 and 15.9cm(2) to apply pressures of 50 and 200kPa. The validity (% difference and Root Mean Square Error: RMSE) and repeatability (Intra-Class Correlation Coefficient: ICC) of the applied pressures (whole insole) and contact area (regional) were outcome variables. Validity of the Pedar system was highest (RMSE 2.6kPa; difference 3.9%), with the Medilogic (RMSE 27.0kPa; difference 13.4%) and Tekscan (RMSE 27.0kPa; difference 5.9%) systems displaying reduced validity. The average and peak pressures demonstrated high between-day repeatability for all three systems and each insole size (ICC≥0.859). The regional contact area % difference ranged from -97 to +249%, but the ICC demonstrated medium to high between-day repeatability (ICC≥0.797). Due to the varying responses of the systems, the choice of an appropriate pressure measurement device must be based on the loading characteristics and the outcome variables sought. Medilogic and Tekscan were most effective between 200 and 300kPa; Pedar performed well across all pressures. Contact area was less precise, but relatively repeatable for all systems.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contact area; Plantar pressure; Repeatability; Validity

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27131180     DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.01.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gait Posture        ISSN: 0966-6362            Impact factor:   2.840


  20 in total

1.  Classifying sitting, standing, and walking using plantar force data.

Authors:  Kohle J Merry; Evan Macdonald; Megan MacPherson; Omar Aziz; Edward Park; Michael Ryan; Carolyn J Sparrey
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 2.  A Systematic Review on Evaluation Strategies for Field Assessment of Upper-Body Industrial Exoskeletons: Current Practices and Future Trends.

Authors:  Pranav Madhav Kuber; Masoud Abdollahi; Mohammad Mehdi Alemi; Ehsan Rashedi
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 4.219

3.  Estimation of Temporal Gait Parameters Using a Wearable Microphone-Sensor-Based System.

Authors:  Cheng Wang; Xiangdong Wang; Zhou Long; Jing Yuan; Yueliang Qian; Jintao Li
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2016-12-17       Impact factor: 3.576

4.  An innovative sealed shoe to off-load and heal diabetic forefoot ulcers - a feasibility study.

Authors:  Gustav Jarl; Roy Tranberg
Journal:  Diabet Foot Ankle       Date:  2017-07-25

5.  The effect of support surface and footwear condition on postural sway and lower limb muscle action of the older women.

Authors:  Meizhen Huang; Kit-Lun Yick; Sun-Pui Ng; Joanne Yip; Roy Tsz-Hei Cheung
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Day-to-day variations in sleep quality affect standing balance in healthy adults.

Authors:  Luis Montesinos; Rossana Castaldo; Francesco P Cappuccio; Leandro Pecchia
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Diabetic Foot Australia guideline on footwear for people with diabetes.

Authors:  Jaap J van Netten; Peter A Lazzarini; David G Armstrong; Sicco A Bus; Robert Fitridge; Keith Harding; Ewan Kinnear; Matthew Malone; Hylton B Menz; Byron M Perrin; Klaas Postema; Jenny Prentice; Karl-Heinz Schott; Paul R Wraight
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2018-01-15       Impact factor: 2.303

8.  Flexible Sensors for Pressure Therapy: Effect of Substrate Curvature and Stiffness on Sensor Performance.

Authors:  Iryna Khodasevych; Suresh Parmar; Olga Troynikov
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2017-10-20       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 9.  Smart Socks and In-Shoe Systems: State-of-the-Art for Two Popular Technologies for Foot Motion Analysis, Sports, and Medical Applications.

Authors:  Andrei Drăgulinescu; Ana-Maria Drăgulinescu; Gabriela Zincă; Doina Bucur; Valentin Feieș; Dumitru-Marius Neagu
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-08-02       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 10.  Indirect Measurement of Ground Reaction Forces and Moments by Means of Wearable Inertial Sensors: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Andrea Ancillao; Salvatore Tedesco; John Barton; Brendan O'Flynn
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-08-05       Impact factor: 3.576

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.