| Literature DB >> 31052569 |
Veronica Cimolin1, Nicola Cau2, Alessandro Sartorio3, Paolo Capodaglio4, Manuela Galli5, Gabriella Tringali6, Bruno Leban7, Micaela Porta8, Massimiliano Pau9.
Abstract
Abnormal excess or lack of body mass can influence gait patterns, but in some cases such differences are subtle and not easy to detect, even with quantitative techniques for movement analysis. In these situations, the study of trunk accelerations may represent an effective way to detecting gait anomalies in terms of symmetry through the calculation of Harmonic Ratio (HR), a parameter obtained by processing trunk accelerations in the frequency domain. In the present study we used this technique to assess the existence of differences in HR during gait in a cohort of 75 healthy children and early adolescents (aged 7-14 years) stratified into 3 equally-sized age and gender-matched groups (Underweight: UW; Normal Weight: NW; Overweight: OW). The accelerometric signal, acquired using a single wearable inertial sensor, was processed to calculate stride length, speed, cadence and HR in antero-posterior, vertical and medio-lateral directions. No differences in spatio-temporal parameters were found among groups, while the HR in the medio-lateral direction was found significantly lower in UW children, while OW exhibited the highest values. On the basis of the results obtained, HR appears capable of discriminating gait symmetry in children with different body mass even when conventional gait parameters are unchanged.Entities:
Keywords: accelerometer; gait; harmonic ratio; low disability; obesity; spatial-temporal parameters
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31052569 PMCID: PMC6539288 DOI: 10.3390/s19092054
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Demographic and anthropometric characteristics of participants. Values are expressed as mean ± SD.
| Underweight | Normal Weight | Overweight | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participants # (M,F) | 25 (13M, 12F) | 25 (13M, 12F) | 25 (13M, 12F) |
| Age (years) | 11.1 ± 1.0 | 11.2 ± 1.2 | 11.7 ± 1.8 |
| Height (cm) | 148.2 ± 9.9 | 147.8 ± 10.3 | 151.9 ± 14.6 |
| Body Mass (kg) | 31.6 ± 5.2 | 38.9 ± 7.7 | 71.5 ± 21.4 a,b |
| Body Mass Index (kg·m−2) | 14.3 ± 0.7 | 17.6 ± 1.9 a | 30.2 ± 5.4 a,b |
a significant difference vs. Underweight (p < 0.001); b significant difference vs. Normal weight (p < 0.001).
Spatio-temporal and symmetry-of-gait parameters calculated for underweight, normal weight and overweight participants. Values are expressed as mean ± SD.
| Underweight | Normal Weight | Overweight | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spatial-temporal parameters of gait | Gait speed (m·s−1) | 1.23 ± 0.29 | 1.22 ± 0.30 | 1.41 ± 0.39 |
| Stride length (m) | 1.18 ± 0.32 | 1.18 ± 0.23 | 1.27 ± 0.46 | |
| Cadence (steps min−1) | 127.59 ± 23.01 | 123.72 ± 18.35 | 146.13 ± 65.01 | |
| Symmetry of gait (HR, Menz et al. [ | AP direction | 2.50 ± 0.80 | 2.90 ± 0.79 | 3.25 ± 0.83 a |
| ML direction | 1.64 ± 0.44 | 2.23 ± 0.74 a | 2.89 ± 0.44 a,b | |
| V direction | 2.23 ± 0.59 | 2.64 ± 0.75 | 2.95 ± 0.88 a | |
| Symmetry of gait (iHR, Pasciuto et al. [ | AP direction | 92.68 ± 4.34 | 93.74 ± 3.35 | 94.53 ± 3.64 |
| ML direction | 73.20 ± 11.80 | 83.98 ± 6.62 a | 90.58 ± 3.22 a,b | |
| V direction | 89.44 ± 5.90 | 92.09 ± 5.44 | 91.59 ± 6.01 |
a significant difference vs. Underweight after Bonferroni correction (p < 0.016); b significant difference vs. Normal Weight after Bonferroni correction (p < 0.016).
Figure 1Trend of HR values for underweight, normal weight and overweight children. Top: values calculated according to the procedure described by Menz et al. [26]. Bottom: values calculated according to the procedure described by Pasciuto et al. [37].
Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients between BMI and HR values.
| Menz et al. (2013) | Pasciuto et al. (2017) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| BMI vs. | HR AP direction | 0.370 ** | 0.252 * |
| HR ML direction | 0.672 ** | 0.663 ** | |
| HR V direction | 0.375 ** | 0.213 |
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.
Figure 2Trend of HR in the ML direction (calculated according to Menz et al., 2003 [26]) with the BMI for all participants.