| Literature DB >> 33808057 |
Se Hoon Kim1, Seo Jung Yun1, Quoc Khanh Dang2,3, Youngjoon Chee3, Sun Gun Chung1, Byung-Mo Oh1,4, Keewon Kim1, Han Gil Seo1.
Abstract
Stooped posture, which is usually aggravated during walking, is one of the typical postural deformities in patients with parkinsonism. However, the degree of stooped posture is difficult to quantitatively measure during walking. Furthermore, continuous feedback on posture is also difficult to provide. The purpose of this study is to measure the degree of stooped posture during gait and to investigate whether vibration feedback from sensor modules can improve a patient's posture. Parkinsonian patients with stooped posture were recruited for this study. Two wearable sensors with three-axis accelerometers were attached, one at the upper neck and the other just below the C7 spinous process of the patients. After being calibrated in the most upright posture, the sensors continuously recorded the sagittal angles at 20 Hz and averaged the data at every second during a 6 min walk test. In the control session, the patients walked with the sensors as usual. In the vibration session, sensory feedback was provided through vibrations from the neck sensor module when the sagittal angle exceeded a programmable threshold value. Data were collected and analyzed successfully in a total of 10 patients. The neck flexion and back flexion were slightly aggravated during gait, although the average change was <10° in most patients in both measurement sessions. Therefore, it was difficult to evaluate the effect of sensory feedback through vibration. However, some patients showed immediate response to the feedback and corrected their posture during gait. In conclusion, this preliminary study suggests that stooped posture could be quantitatively measured during gait by using wearable sensors in patients with parkinsonism. Sensory feedback through vibration from sensor modules may help in correcting posture during gait in selected patients.Entities:
Keywords: biomechanics; gait/balance; neurologic disorders; posture
Year: 2021 PMID: 33808057 PMCID: PMC8038058 DOI: 10.3390/s21072379
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1(A) Neck sensor on the C2-3 spinous process area. (B) Back sensor on the C7-T1 spinous process area, just below the prominence of C7.
Demographics and diagnosis.
| Patient | Sex | Age | BMI | Diagnosis | HnY | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | F | 74 | 23.1 | IPD | 2.5 | 2.9 years |
| #2 | F | 72 | 22.8 | IPD | 3 | 1.8 years |
| #3 | F | 74 | 16.4 | IPD | 2.5 | 11.1 years |
| #4 | F | 79 | 19.4 | IPD | 3 | 3.1 years |
| #5 | F | 65 | 17.0 | IPD | 2 | 12.1 years |
| #6 | F | 72 | 22.0 | IPD | 3 | 11.1 years |
| #7 | M | 66 | 29.1 | MSA-P | 3 | 4.0 years |
| #8 | F | 60 | 22.7 | IPD | 2.5 | 11.0 years |
| #9 | F | 76 | 28.0 | IPD | 3 | 3.6 years |
| #10 | M | 68 | 22.2 | IPD | 2.5 | 10.9 years |
IPD, Idiopathic Parkinson’s Disease; MSA-P, multiple system atrophy–parkinsonian type; HnY, Hoehn and Yahr scale.
Individual data of study participants.
| Patient | Control | Vibration | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Base_N | Base_B | Mean_N | Mean_B | Distance | Base_N | Base_B | Mean_N | Mean_B | Distance | Vib # | Thr | |
| #1 | 87 | 72 | 8.85 | 8.74 | 219 | 101 | 75 | 8.56 | 8.06 | 218 | 11 | 20 |
| #2 | 100 | 63 | 3.2 | 2.52 | 208 | 105 | 62 | 13.15 | 5.57 | 268 | 17 | 20 |
| #3 | 104 | 55 | −0.33 | 5.87 | 341 | 102 | 52 | 6.75 | 5.67 | 360 | 0 | 20 |
| #4 | 88 | 53 | 9.57 | 6.54 | 251 | 92 | 55 | 3.53 | 8.69 | 216 | 0 | 20 |
| #5 | 97 | 60 | 2.85 | 2.55 | 340 | 97 | 62 | −2.6 | −1.68 | 330 | 0 | 10 |
| #6 | 99 | 52 | 0.78 | 5.29 | 263 | 99 | 55 | −1.18 | 3.54 | 226 | 11 | 10 |
| #7 | 88 | 83 | 20.21 | 16.46 | 116 | 91 | 89 | 12.99 | 23.11 | 133 | 240 | 10 |
| #8 | 77 | 89 | 9.72 | −2.75 | 276 | 96 | 91 | 5.39 | 1.03 | 289 | 27 | 10 |
| #9 | 86 | 87 | 5.45 | 2.29 | 246 | 89 | 91 | 0.39 | −2.37 | 233 | 24 | 10 |
| #10 | 81 | 86 | 22.87 | 18.94 | 290 | 93 | 98 | 21.82 | 35.88 | 267 | 290 | 10 |
| Mean | 90.7 | 70.0 | 8.32 | 6.65 | 255 | 96.5 | 73.0 | 6.88 | 8.75 | 254 | 62 | |
| SD | 8.84 | 15.15 | 7.84 | 6.63 | 66.06 | 5.25 | 17.84 | 7.55 | 11.93 | 64.30 | 108.06 | |
Base_N, baseline neck flexion angle in upright posture; Base_B, baseline back flexion angle in upright posture; Mean_N, mean change of neck flexion angle during gait; Mean_B, mean change of back flexion angle during gait; Vib #, the number of vibration; Thr, threshold; HR, end of test HR–beginning of test HR; RPE, end of test RPE–beginning of test R.
Figure 2The changes of neck and back flexion angles continuously measured during 6 min walk test in patient #1. (A) The changes of neck flexion angles in the control session. (B) The changes of back flexion angles in the control session. (C) The changes of neck flexion angles in the vibration session. (D) The changes of back flexion angles in the vibration session. Red circles: Reminding the patient by vibration feedback.
Figure 3The changes of neck and back flexion angles continuously measured during 6 min walk test in patient #6. (A) The changes of neck flexion angles in the control session. (B) The changes of back flexion angles in the control session. (C) The changes of neck flexion angles in the vibration session. (D) The changes of back flexion angles in the vibration session. Red circles: Reminding the patient by vibration feedback.