Literature DB >> 30670328

New considerations for collecting biomechanical data using wearable sensors: Number of level runs to define a stable running pattern with a single IMU.

Lauren C Benson1, Nizam U Ahamed2, Dylan Kobsar3, Reed Ferber4.   

Abstract

Wearable technology can be used to quantify running biomechanical patterns in a runner's natural environment, however, changes in external factors during outdoor running may influence a runner's typical gait pattern. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine how many runs are needed to define a stable or typical running pattern. Six biomechanical variables were recorded using a single wearable sensor placed on the lower back during ten outdoor runs for twelve runners. Univariate and multivariate distributions were created and based on the probability density function, the percent of similar data points (within 95%) from each unique run for the same runner were determined. Stability was defined when the addition of data from a new run resulted in less than a 5% change in the probability density function. To cross-validate, the percent of similar data points at stability was compared between the same and different runners using a repeated-measures MANOVA (Bonferroni-corrected α = 0.007). The maximum number of runs needed to reach stability for univariate and multivariate analyses was four and five, respectively. There was a significant overall effect on similar data points between the same and different runners (p = 0.001), with a greater percent of similar data points for the same runner compared to other runners (p < 0.007). Based on biomechanical data collected using a single wearable sensor placed on the lower back, this is the first study to show that four (univariate) to five (multivariate) runs are needed to establish a stable running pattern in real-world settings.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Inertial measurement unit; Outdoor surfaces; Running; Wearable technology

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30670328     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.01.004

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


  6 in total

1.  Between-Day Reliability of Commonly Used IMU Features during a Fatiguing Run and the Effect of Speed.

Authors:  Hannah L Dimmick; Cody R van Rassel; Martin J MacInnis; Reed Ferber
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-29       Impact factor: 3.847

2.  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

Review 3.  Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis in Adults with Osteoarthritis-A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Dylan Kobsar; Zaryan Masood; Heba Khan; Noha Khalil; Marium Yossri Kiwan; Sarah Ridd; Matthew Tobis
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-12-13       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 4.  Applications of Wearable Technology in a Real-Life Setting in People with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Authors:  Tomasz Cudejko; Kate Button; Jake Willott; Mohammad Al-Amri
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 5.  Quantifying exposure to running for meaningful insights into running-related injuries.

Authors:  John J Davis Iv; Allison H Gruber
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2019-10-13

Review 6.  Is This the Real Life, or Is This Just Laboratory? A Scoping Review of IMU-Based Running Gait Analysis.

Authors:  Lauren C Benson; Anu M Räisänen; Christian A Clermont; Reed Ferber
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 3.576

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.