Literature DB >> 29100144

Moving from laboratory to real life conditions: Influence on the assessment of variability and stability of gait.

Paola Tamburini1, Fabio Storm2, Chris Buckley3, Maria Cristina Bisi4, Rita Stagni4, Claudia Mazzà3.   

Abstract

The availability of wearable sensors allows shifting gait analysis from the traditional laboratory settings, to daily life conditions. However, limited knowledge is available about whether alterations associated to different testing environment (e.g. indoor or outdoor) and walking protocols (e.g. free or controlled), result from actual differences in the motor behaviour of the tested subjects or from the sensitivity to these changes of the indexes adopted for the assessment. In this context, it was hypothesized that testing environment and walking protocols would not modify motor control stability in the gait of young healthy adults, who have a mature and structured gait pattern, but rather the variability of their motor pattern. To test this hypothesis, data from trunk and shank inertial sensors were collected from 19 young healthy participants during four walking tasks in different environments (indoor and outdoor) and in both controlled (i.e. following a predefined straight path) and free conditions. Results confirmed what hypothesized: variability indexes (Standard deviation, Coefficient of variation and Poincaré plots) were significantly influenced by both environment and walking conditions. Stability indexes (Harmonic ratio, Short term Lyapunov exponents, Recurrence quantification analysis and Sample entropy), on the contrary, did not highlight any change in the motor control. In conclusion, this study highlighted an influence of environment and testing condition on the assessment of specific characteristics of gait (i.e. variability and stability). In particular, for young healthy adults, both environment and testing conditions affect gait variability indexes, whereas neither affect gait stability indexes.
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Accelerometers; Daily life gait; Indoor and outdoor walking; Inertial sensors; Stability indexes; Variability indexes

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29100144     DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.10.024

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


  15 in total

1.  Wearable Inertial Sensors to Assess Gait during the 6-Minute Walk Test: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Fabio Alexander Storm; Ambra Cesareo; Gianluigi Reni; Emilia Biffi
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 3.576

2.  A Personalized Approach to Improve Walking Detection in Real-Life Settings: Application to Children with Cerebral Palsy.

Authors:  Lena Carcreff; Anisoara Paraschiv-Ionescu; Corinna N Gerber; Christopher J Newman; Stéphane Armand; Kamiar Aminian
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-03       Impact factor: 3.576

3.  Effects of Wearable Devices with Biofeedback on Biomechanical Performance of Running-A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Alexandra Giraldo-Pedroza; Winson Chiu-Chun Lee; Wing-Kai Lam; Robyn Coman; Gursel Alici
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 3.576

4.  Foot Pressure Wearable Sensors for Freezing of Gait Detection in Parkinson's Disease.

Authors:  Andrea Marcante; Roberto Di Marco; Giovanni Gentile; Clelia Pellicano; Francesca Assogna; Francesco Ernesto Pontieri; Gianfranco Spalletta; Lucia Macchiusi; Dimitris Gatsios; Alexandros Giannakis; Maria Chondrogiorgi; Spyridon Konitsiotis; Dimitrios I Fotiadis; Angelo Antonini
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 3.576

5.  Laboratory versus daily life gait characteristics in patients with multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, and matched controls.

Authors:  Vrutangkumar V Shah; James McNames; Martina Mancini; Patricia Carlson-Kuhta; Rebecca I Spain; John G Nutt; Mahmoud El-Gohary; Carolin Curtze; Fay B Horak
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 4.262

6.  Indoor vs. Outdoor Walking: Does It Make Any Difference in Joint Angle Depending on Road Surface?

Authors:  Haruki Toda; Tsubasa Maruyama; Mitsunori Tada
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2020-09-18

7.  Free-living and laboratory gait characteristics in patients with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Fabio A Storm; K P S Nair; Alison J Clarke; Jill M Van der Meulen; Claudia Mazzà
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Gait Asymmetry Post-Stroke: Determining Valid and Reliable Methods Using a Single Accelerometer Located on the Trunk.

Authors:  Christopher Buckley; M Encarna Micó-Amigo; Michael Dunne-Willows; Alan Godfrey; Aodhán Hickey; Sue Lord; Lynn Rochester; Silvia Del Din; Sarah A Moore
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 9.  Sensor-to-Segment Calibration Methodologies for Lower-Body Kinematic Analysis with Inertial Sensors: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Léonie Pacher; Christian Chatellier; Rodolphe Vauzelle; Laetitia Fradet
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-06-11       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  Wearable Tendon Kinetics.

Authors:  Sara E Harper; Rebecca A Roembke; John D Zunker; Darryl G Thelen; Peter G Adamczyk
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.576

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.