Literature DB >> 31374620

Sensitivity comparison of inertial to optical motion capture during gait: implications for tracking recovery.

Jeonghwan Lee, Sung Yul Shin, Gaurav Ghorpade, Tunc Akbas, James Sulzer.   

Abstract

Wearable sensors provide a foundation for development of wearable robotic technology to be used in clinical applications. Inertial motion capture (IMC) has emerged as a viable alternative to more cumbersome, non-portable optical methods. Previous work has validated the accuracy of IMC for gait compared to optical motion capture (OMC). However, it is unclear how well IMC can measure the small changes in gait function needed to gauge recovery. In this study, we evaluate the sensitivity of IMC compared to OMC to small changes in gait on a cohort of unimpaired individuals during treadmill walking. Eight individuals walked on a split-belt treadmill in three-minute trials with five randomized conditions: right belt speed decrementing at 0.05 m/s from 1.0 m/s, all with left belt held at 1.0 m/s, simulating recovery of hemiparetic gait. We extracted the root mean square deviation (RMSD) of joint kinematics between limbs and within the limb with modulated gait speed as the main outcome measure. We used linear mixed models to identify differences in sensitivity to changes in gait asymmetry and gait speed. Based on these models, we estimated the minimal detectible interval in gait parameters. We found that IMC was capable of measuring a difference in gait speed of 0.08 m/s, roughly the equivalent of two weeks recovery progress. Statistically we could not conclude a difference of sensitivity between IMC and OMC, although there is a strong trend that IMC is more sensitive to changes in gait. We conclude that IMC is a valid tool to measure progress in gait kinematics over the course of recovery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31374620     DOI: 10.1109/ICORR.2019.8779411

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot        ISSN: 1945-7898


  5 in total

1.  A database of human gait performance on irregular and uneven surfaces collected by wearable sensors.

Authors:  Yue Luo; Sarah M Coppola; Philippe C Dixon; Song Li; Jack T Dennerlein; Boyi Hu
Journal:  Sci Data       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 6.444

2.  Quantifying dosage of physical therapy using lower body kinematics: a longitudinal pilot study on early post-stroke individuals.

Authors:  Sung Yul Shin; Robert K Lee; Patrick Spicer; James Sulzer
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 4.262

3.  Accuracy and Reliability of Single-Camera Measurements of Ankle Clonus and Quadriceps Hyperreflexia.

Authors:  Keith Macon; Dustin Hoang; Lauren Elizondo; Kerri Kallus; James Sulzer; Kathleen Manella
Journal:  Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl       Date:  2021-08-19

4.  Reliability of IMU-Based Gait Assessment in Clinical Stroke Rehabilitation.

Authors:  Richard A W Felius; Marieke Geerars; Sjoerd M Bruijn; Jaap H van Dieën; Natasja C Wouda; Michiel Punt
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 3.576

5.  Remote Recognition of Moving Behaviors for Captive Harbor Seals Using a Smart-Patch System via Bluetooth Communication.

Authors:  Seungyeob Kim; Jinheon Jeong; Seung Gi Seo; Sehyeok Im; Won Young Lee; Sung Hun Jin
Journal:  Micromachines (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-04       Impact factor: 2.891

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.