Literature DB >> 27289414

Comparison of accelerometry stride time calculation methods.

Michelle Norris1, Ian C Kenny2, Ross Anderson2.   

Abstract

Inertial sensors such as accelerometers and gyroscopes can provide a multitude of information on running gait. Running parameters such as stride time and ground contact time can all be identified within tibial accelerometry data. Within this, stride time is a popular parameter of interest, possibly due to its role in running economy. However, there are multiple methods utilised to derive stride time from tibial accelerometry data, some of which may offer complications when implemented on larger data files. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare previously utilised methods of stride time derivation to an original proposed method, utilising medio-lateral tibial acceleration data filtered at 2Hz, allowing for greater efficiency in stride time output. Tibial accelerometry data from six participants training for a half marathon were utilised. One right leg run was randomly selected for each participant, in which five consecutive running stride times were calculated. Four calculation methods were employed to derive stride time. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) identified no significant difference in stride time between stride time calculation methods (p=1.00), whilst intra-class coefficient values (all >0.95) and coefficient of variance values (all <1.5%) indicate good reliability. Results indicate that the proposed method possibly offers a simplified technique for stride time output during running gait analysis. This method may be less influenced by "double peak" error and minor fluctuations within the data, allowing for accurate and efficient automated data output in both real time and post processing.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Accelerometry; Analysis; Gait; Inertial sensor; Performance

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27289414     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.05.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  6 in total

1.  Effect of data length on time delay and embedding dimension for calculating the Lyapunov exponent in walking.

Authors:  Victoria Smith Hussain; Mark L Spano; Thurmon E Lockhart
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 2.  Trends Supporting the In-Field Use of Wearable Inertial Sensors for Sport Performance Evaluation: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Valentina Camomilla; Elena Bergamini; Silvia Fantozzi; Giuseppe Vannozzi
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 3.  The Use of Wearable Sensors for Preventing, Assessing, and Informing Recovery from Sport-Related Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Authors:  Ezio Preatoni; Elena Bergamini; Silvia Fantozzi; Lucie I Giraud; Amaranta S Orejel Bustos; Giuseppe Vannozzi; Valentina Camomilla
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 3.847

4.  Does Site Matter? Impact of Inertial Measurement Unit Placement on the Validity and Reliability of Stride Variables During Running: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Benjamin J Horsley; Paul J Tofari; Shona L Halson; Justin G Kemp; Jessica Dickson; Nirav Maniar; Stuart J Cormack
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 11.136

5.  Does the Position of Foot-Mounted IMU Sensors Influence the Accuracy of Spatio-Temporal Parameters in Endurance Running?

Authors:  Markus Zrenner; Arne Küderle; Nils Roth; Ulf Jensen; Burkhard Dümler; Bjoern M Eskofier
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 3.576

6.  The effects of walking speed and mobile phone use on the walking dynamics of young adults.

Authors:  Patrick Crowley; Nicolas Vuillerme; Afshin Samani; Pascal Madeleine
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-13       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.