| Literature DB >> 34168608 |
Dhanya Menoth Mohan1, Ahsan Habib Khandoker1, Sabahat Asim Wasti2, Sarah Ismail Ibrahim Ismail Alali1, Herbert F Jelinek1, Kinda Khalaf1.
Abstract
Background: Gait dysfunction or impairment is considered one of the most common and devastating physiological consequences of stroke, and achieving optimal gait is a key goal for stroke victims with gait disability along with their clinical teams. Many researchers have explored post stroke gait, including assessment tools and techniques, key gait parameters and significance on functional recovery, as well as data mining, modeling and analyses methods. Research Question: This study aimed to review and summarize research efforts applicable to quantification and analyses of post-stroke gait with focus on recent technology-driven gait characterization and analysis approaches, including the integration of smart low cost wearables and Artificial Intelligence (AI), as well as feasibility and potential value in clinical settings.Entities:
Keywords: artificial intelligence; dynamics; gait; hemiplegia; machine learning; post-stroke; spatiotemporal; statistical tools
Year: 2021 PMID: 34168608 PMCID: PMC8217618 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.650024
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Stroke scales and characteristics.
| Barthel Index ( | 1955 | 10 | 5 min | Each task uses different scores from (0, 5, 10, 15) | 0–100; least to great independence | Measurement of functional independence in stroke patients |
| Modified Rankin Scale ( | 1957 | 6 items | 5 min | 6-Point ordinal scale (0–5); score of 6 added denote death | 0–5; no symptoms to severe disability | Describes the degree of disability in daily activities of people with stroke or other neurological disorder |
| Hunt & Hess Scale ( | 1968 | 5 | NA | Not weighted | 1–5; minimum to maximum mortality | Prediction of prognosis and outcome in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage |
| Mathew Stroke Scale ( | 1972 | 10 | 15 min | Arbitrarily weighted | 100 point scale; lower scores reflect a more severe deficit | Measurement of stroke severity in clinical trials; designed for study on glycerol therapy |
| Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ( | 1974 | 3 components | 2 min | Tasks graded using 4 (1–4), 5 (1–5), and 6 (1–6) point ordinal scale | 3–15; Deep comma to fully awake | Assessment of level of consciousness (LOC) for acute medical and trauma patients |
| Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) ( | 1975 | 5 items | Few seconds | Not weighted | 1–5; dead to a good recovery | Used for categorizing the outcomes of patients after traumatic brain injury |
| Fugl-Meyer assessment scale ( | 1975 | 28 | 35 min | Ordinal scale | 172 point scale | Used to assess motor and joint functioning, balance, and sensation in stroke patients with hemiplegia |
| Toronto stroke scale ( | 1976 | 11 categories | NA | NA | 0 to 155 | Used for evaluating acute stroke patients |
| Orgogozo Stroke Scale ( | 1983 | 10 | 10 min | Ordinal scale | 0–100; severe to normal | Used for patients with middle cerebral artery infarction |
| Functional Independence Measurement (FIM) ( | 1984 | 18 | 30-45 min | 7-Point ordinal scale, 1 (requiring complete dependence) to 7 (completely independent) | 18–126; complete dependence to complete independence | Used for assessing a patient's level of disability |
| Canadian Neurological Stroke Scale (CNS) ( | 1986 | 8 | 5–10 min | Each section uses different scores from (0,0.5,1,1.5, 3) | 1.5–11.5; lower to greater neurological deficit | Evaluation and monitoring of acute-stroke neurological status |
| Hemispheric Stroke Scale ( | 1987 | 20 | 15-30 min | Ordinal scale | 0–100; Good to bad | Assessment of neurological deficit in stroke therapy using hemodilution |
| Modified Mathew Stroke Scale | 1988 | 10 | NA | Ordinal scale | NA | Used in nimodipine and hemodilution studies for acute stroke |
| Copenhagen stroke scale ( | 1988 | 10 item | <10 min | Ordinal scale; | NA | For estimating the initial severity of stroke |
| NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) ( | 1989 | 15 | 7 min | Each scores between 0 and 4 | 0–42; No stroke symptoms to severe stroke | Measurement of neurological deficit in acute stroke patients |
| Scandinavian Stroke Scale ( | 1992 | 9 | 5 min | Ordinal scale | 0–58; very severe to mild | Designed for non-neurologists for multicenter hemodilution trials |
| European Stroke Scale ( | 1994 | 14 | 8 min | Arbitrarily weighted tasks | 0–100; maximally affected to normal | Detection of therapeutic effect and matching of treatment groups for middle cerebral artery stroke |
| Japan stroke scale ( | NA | 10 | NA | Weighted tasks | NA | Measuring stroke severity |
NA, not available.
Observational gait scales and characteristics.
| Gait Assessment and Intervention Tool (G.A.I.T) ( | kinematics | 31 | 2 to 4-level ordinal scale | 20 min, not including videotaping | 0–62; normal to greatest extent of gait deviation |
| New York Medical School Orthotic Gait Analysis, (NYMSOGA) ( | kinematics, spatiotemporal | 17 | 3-level ordinal | not reported | not reported |
| Hemiplegic Gait Analysis Form (HGAF) ( | kinematics, spatiotemporal | 18 | 3-level ordinal scale | not reported | 0–88; normal to abnormal gait |
| Rivermead Visual Gait Assessment (RVGA) ( | kinematic | 20 | 4-level ordinal scale | 10–15 min | 0–59; normal to abnormal gait |
| Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS) ( | kinematics, spatiotemporal | 14 | 3, 4, and 5-level ordinal scale | 35–45 min for video recording and offline processing | 13.35–42; normal to worst |
| Tinetti Gait Scale (TGS) ( | kinematic | 8 | 2 and 3-level ordinal scale | 5 min | 0–12; most deviation to normal |
| Gait Abnormality Rating Scale - modified (GARS-M) ( | kinematics, spatiotemporal | 7 | 4-level ordinal scale | not reported | 0–21; low to high risk of falling |
Figure 1Flowchart of the search.
Figure 2Functional phases of a normal gait cycle according to (50).
Typical gait parameters of an adult healthy population.
| Gait velocity (m/s) | 1.30–1.46 |
| Stride length (m) | 1.68–1.72 |
| Step length (m) | 0.68–0.85 |
| Stance phase (s) | 0.62–0.70 |
| Swing phase (s) | 0.36–0.40 |
| Cadence - fast walking (steps/min) | 113–118 |
| Single support (% of stride) | 60.6–62.0 |
| Double support (% of stride) | 21.2–23.8 |
Data adapted from (.
Figure 3An example of uncorrected post-stroke spastic gait pattern (66).
An overview of the literature focusing on gait parameters and measurement devices for post-stroke gait studies considered in this review.
| Moseley et al. ( | Segmented kinematics | n/a | n/a | n/a | Decreased peak hip extension in the late stance phase; Decreased peak lateral pelvic displacement in stance phase; Increased peak lateral pelvic displacement in stance phase; Decreased knee flexion (or knee hyperextension) in stance phase; Increased knee flexion in stance phase; Decreased ankle plantarflexion at toe-off. |
| Moore et al. ( | Segmented kinematics | n/a | n/a | n/a | Decreased peak hip flexion and ankle dorsiflexion in swing phase; Reduction in the peak knee flexion in early swing phase; Decreased knee extension prior to heel strike; |
| Nickel ( | Gait velocity, gait cycle time, cadence, stride length, total double support time, single support time, duration of stance phase, duration of swing phase | 49 stroke patients and 24 controls (controls had either transient ischemic episodes or asymptomatic carotid stenosis, symmetrical gait without walking support); time since stroke | avg 43.4 (range 0.5 to 336) months | Portable stride analyser, an insole system with compression foot switches (B& L Engineering, Santa Fe Springs, CA). | Cadence and velocity improved over time; Asymmetric patterns did not change over time; Age-matched controls in this study showed abnormal gait behavior compared to normal subjects. |
| Olney et al. ( | Spatiotemporal, joint kinematics, moments, mechanical work and power | 31 hemiplegic stroke patients | avg 11.4 (range 2.0 to 88.0) months | 2D motion capture system (LoCam 51 camera); 3 trials; | Use of principal component analysis (PCA) for clustering of variables. |
| Silver et al. ( | Walking speed, cadence, gait cycle symmetry (intralimb stance-swing ratio, interlimb stance duration ratio, interlimb swing ratio, overall stance-swing ratio) | 5 post-ischemic stroke patients (mild to moderate gait asymmetries due to residual hemiparesis) | 26 ± 4.6 (range 9 to 70) months | Videotape (Peak Motus Video Analysis system); modified Get-Up and Go task. | Improvements in walking speed and cadence, reduction in time required to complete the task; Sophisticated kinematics and kinetics analysis required to draw further results. |
| Woolley ( | Distance and temporal parameters, joint kinematics, kinetics, mechanical power, energy expenditure, electromyography | n/a | n/a | n/a | Many gait deviations in the hemiplegic patients may be related to reduced walking velocity. |
| Hesse ( | Stance and swing time symmetry, ground reaction forces, muscle activity profile, cardiovascular fitness | Hemiparetic subjects | n/a | 10 meter test most commonly used; 2 walking trials | 10-meter test and 6 min test are highly recommended to derive basic gait parameters; Abnormal muscle activity observed in stroke population; trajectory of vertical forces and center of pressure varies between controls and post-stroke patients; appearance of stance and swing time asymmetry. |
| Hsu et al. ( | Gait velocity, step length asymmetry ratio, single support time asymmetry ratio | 26 stroke patients (those with limited lower-body joint range of motion, joint pain, and history of unstable medical conditions, neurological, and/or musculoskeletal issues were excluded) | avg 10.3 (range 1 to 43) months | GaitMatII (EQ Inc., Plymouth Meeting, PA) (3.8 m); Cybex 6000 isokinetic dynamometer (Cybex International Inc., Medway, MA) to measure isokinetic muscle strength; 6 trials per speed condition; comfortable- and fast-speed | The weakness of the affected hip flexors and knee extensors contribute to a decrease in gait velocity; The spasticity of the affected ankle plantarflexors causes asymmetry. |
| Patterson et al. ( | Stance time, swing time, double support time, intra-limb ratio of swing-stance time, step length, spatiotemporal symmetry | 161 stroke patients and 81 age-matched healthy subjects | avg 23.7 (SD 32.1) months | GAITRite (10 m); 3 trials | Ratio equation can be used for standardization due to its clinical utility; Swing time, stance time, and step length are the most useful gait parameters |
| Patterson et al. ( | Velocity, spatiotemporal symmetry | 171 stroke patients data (first-ever unilateral stroke; hemorrhagic or ischemic) | avg 23.3 (SD 31.1) months | GAITRite mat (CIR Systems Inc., New Jersey, USA); 3 trials; preferred/comfortable speed | Swing time, stance time, and step length asymmetries may progress in the long term post-stroke stages; In terms of gait velocity and neurological and motor deficit, no difference is seen across the stages. |
| Laudanski ( | joint angles of hip, knee, and ankle | 10 chronic hemiparetic stroke patients and 10 healthy controls | 6.5 ± 5.4 years | 7 IMU sensors (Xsens Technology B.V., Netherlands), placed at midthigh, midshank, midfoot, and pelvis; Optotrak 3020 system (Northern Digital Inc., Ontario, Canada) for validation; force plates (AMTI, Newton, MA); 3 trials; self-selected speed | IMU-based systems are suitable for lower limb major joint angle estimation of healthy subjects and range of motion estimation of stroke patients. Additional calibration techniques are required for the application in stroke population. |
| Yang et al. ( | Walking speed, temporal symmetry (stance ratio, swing ratio, swing-stance ratio, overall symmetry ratio) | 13 stroke patients (with unilateral lower limb weakness; able to walk independently; and could follow instructions) | 23.4 ± 15.1 months | Two IMU sensors (MicroStrain Inc., Williston, USA); shank-mounted; 10 m walking test; 3 trials; self-selected speed | Subjects' walking speed was comparable with other studies on stroke; Gait symmetry measurements were consistent with previous studies. |
| Nadeau et al. ( | Spatio-temporal parameters, kinematics, kinetics | Provides a comparison with literature in terms of the actual values for healthy | n/a | Optotrak system (Northern Digital Inc., Ontario, Canada) | Kinematics:- lower limb joint motion profiles similar to those of healthy individuals, but with reduced peak amplitudes; Kinetics:- Asymmetric pattern, and reduced peak moment and powers on the affected side. |
| Trojaniello et al. ( | Gait velocity, stance time, swing time, step time, stride time | 10 hemiparetic subjects, 10 subjects with Parkinson's disease, 10 subjects with Huntington's disease, and 10 healthy elderly subjects | n/a | Single IMU (Opal™, APDM); lower-trunk mounted; GAITRite (12 m); single trial; self-selected, comfortable speed | Temporal parameters measured were less accurate due to the presence of missed/extra gait events; Post-stroke gait analysis using single IMU is found to be challenging. |
| Parisi et al. ( | Gait cycle time, stance time, swing time, initial double support time, terminal double support duration, cadence, velocity, step length, stride length | 5 hemiparetic stroke patients and 3 healthy controls | n/a | Single IMU (Shimmer, Dublin, Ireland) placed at lower trunk; optoelectronic motion capture system (ELITE 2002, BTS S.p.A., Milano, Italy) for validation; 2 force plates; 12 m hallway; 1-3 trials; self-selected speed | Low-cost system for accurate measurement of spatiotemporal features. |
| Wüest et al. ( | Gait velocity, cadence, stride length, gait limb phase, gait stance phase, gait peak swing velocity, gait asymmetry | 14 stroke patients (ischemic or hemorrhagic; free from musculoskeletal illness, cardiovascular disorders, or other neurologic diseases) and 25 nondisabled controls | any stage after stroke | 8 body-fixed inertial sensors (Physilog, GaitUp; Lausanne, Switzerland); 2 sessions each with 3 trials; Timed Get-Up and Go task; | Excellent test-retest reliability; IMU-based timed Get-Up and Go can distinguish stroke patients from nondisabled controls. |
| Zhang et al. ( | Path length, strike angle, lift of angle, maximum angular velocity, stance ratio, load ratio, foot flat ratio, push ratio | 16 stroke patients (ischemic or hemorrhagic) and 9 healthy controls | 5 months to 11 years (median 20 months) | Inertial sensors (MTw Awinda, Xsens Technologies B.V., Enschede, The Netherlands), shoe and lower-back mounted; 6 Minute-Walk-Test | Symmetry assessment using a single 3D accelerometer on low back shows good discriminative power compared to the one based on spatiotemporal parameters derived from two feet sensors. |
| Rastegarpanah et al. ( | Step speed, step length, step time, joint angles of hip, knee, and ankle, peak ground reaction forces | 4 stroke patients with hemiparesis, and 4 healthy controls (no history of neurological disorders or brain damage) | n/a | VICON MX System; Kistler force plate; 10-meter walk; 6 trials | Effect of targeting motor control on spatiotemporal parameters of gait in healthy controls as well as stroke patients; effect on peak ground reaction forces in stroke patients. |
| Solanki et al. ( | Stride length, step length, stride time, step time, single support time, swing and stance phase duration, symmetry index | 9 post-stroke patients and 15 healthy controls | 1 to 48 months | Shoe FSR (Force Sensing Resistors), paper walkway, VICON (Vicon Motion Systems Ltd, Oxford, United Kingdom) | Design of a cost-effective and portable Shoe FSR device for gait characterization using spatiotemporal data; applicable for outdoor use. |
| Latorre et al. ( | spatiotemporal and kinematic | 82 post-stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic) patients (age≥10, able to walk 10 m with/without assistance, able to understand instructions) and 355 healthy subjects (age≥10, no history of musculoskeletal or vestibular disease and/or prosthetic surgery) | 748.55 ± 785.12 days | Kinect v2; at a comfortable speed | The system showed excellent reliability, validity, and variable sensitivity, thus can be used as alternative to expensive laboratory-based assessment systems, although its sensitivity to kinematic measurements is limited. |
| Wang et al. ( | plantar pressure difference (PPD), step count, stride time, coefficient of variation, phase coordination index (PCI) | 18 hemiparetic patients and 17 healthy adults | n/a | textile capacitive pressure sensing insole with a real-time monitoring system; 20 m long corridor;at a comfortable speed | In comparison with healthy adults, stroke patients showed higher PPD, larger step count, a larger average stride time and a lower mean plantar pressure on the paretic leg, increased plantar pressure in the toe region and lateral foot, and a threefold higher PCI. This study further confirmed the clinical applicability of textile insole sensors. |
| Rogers et al. ( | peak plantar pressure and contact area | 21 stroke patients (≥3 months post-stroke, able to walk 10 m independently with or without a walking aid, had no other co-existing neurological condition) | ≥3 months | Tekscan HR Mat (TekScan™ South Boston, USA); 3 walking trials; self-selected comfortable speed; 2 test sessions in 2 weeks apart | Plantar pressure analysis protocol resulted in good to excellent repeatability for foot regions, except for toes. |
Gait analysis instruments, advantages, disadvantages, and current manufacturers.
| Pressure mat | Less setup time, easy to operate | High cost, non-portable, restricted to over-ground trials, require specific operational space | Tekscan Inc. (Walkway, F-Mat), Novel Electronics Inc. (EMED) |
| Pressure insole | Portable, cost-effective, does not require specific operational space, useful for indoor and outdoor setup | Low accuracy compared to pressure mat | Tekscan Inc (F-Scan), Novel Electronics Inc. (Pedar) |
| Motion capture | Highly accurate, useful for complex tasks involving motion in multiple planes | High cost, non-portable, additional time requirements for initial setup and calibration, special training required for operating the system, restrictions to indoor setup | Northern Digital Inc. (Optotrak), Qualisys (Arqus, Miqus), Vicon Motion Systems Ltd (VICON), BTS S.p.A. (Elite, SMART-DX) |
| Wearable sensors | Low cost, does not require specific operational space, useful for indoor and outdoor setup, less setup and calibration time | Special algorithms required to combine multiple sensor data | Xsens (MTw), Shimmer Sensing (Shimmer3 IMU), GaitUp SA (Physilog) |
An overview of the AI techniques applicable for gait analysis.
| Lau et al. ( | Kinematic data | Support vector machines (SVM), Artificial neural network (ANN), Radial Basis Function network (RBF), and Bayesian Belief Network (BBN). |
| Lai et al. ( | Spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, and EMG data | Signal processing and computational intelligence methods. |
| Lau et al. ( | Kinematics data | SVM, ANN, RBF. |
| Kaptein et al. ( | kinematic and physiological data | Analysis of variance (ANOVA) supplemented by logistic and partial least squares (PLS) regressions. |
| Laroche et al. ( | Kinematic trajectories | SVM. |
| Karg et al. ( | time series gait data | Hidden Markov Model (HMM). |
| Cippitelli et al. ( | body joint trajectories | Algorithm based on anthropometric models. |
| Joyseeree et al. ( | Spatiotemporal data | Random Forest (RF), boosting, Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), and SVM. |
| LeMoyne et al. ( | Temporal and kinetic data | SVM. |
| Ferber et al. ( | n/a | n/a. |
| Osis et al. ( | Kinematic data and ground reaction forces | Principal Component Analysis (PCA). |
| Zeng et al. ( | Vertical GRF | RBF networks. |
| Hannink et al. ( | Spatiotemporal data | Deep convolutional neural networks. |
| Caldas et al. ( | IMU data | artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms [e.g., artificial neural networks (ANN) and hidden Markov models (HMM)]. |
| Park et al. ( | Spatiotemporal and plantar pressure | Random forest classification. |
| Pham and Yan ( | Vertical GRF | Tensor decomposition. |
| Ertelt et al. ( | GRF | Bayesian regulated neural networks. |
| Haji Ghassemi et al. ( | Inertial data | Peak detection, two variants of dynamic time warping (DTW) methods [Euclidean DTW (eDTW) and probabilistic DTW (pDTW)], and hierarchical hidden Markov models (hHMM). |
| Zhan et al. ( | Stride length | A rank-based machine-learning algorithm called disease severity score learning (DSSL). |
| Zhang et al. ( | GRF | SVM. |
| Bastien et al. ( | Ground reaction forces (GRF) | A predictive linear model of the fore-aft GRF. |
| Galbusera et al. ( | review article | Machine learning and deep learning. |
| Jiang et al. ( | Inertial data, GRF | Random forest learning. |
| Nguyen et al. ( | Inertial data | PCA, SVM, ANN. |
| Prado et al. ( | Temporal data | Recurrent Neural Network classifier model. |
| Waugh et al. ( | Accelerometer data | Canonical dynamical system (CDS)Fourier series. |
| Jauhiainen et al. ( | Kinematic data | Cluster analysis. |