| Literature DB >> 36236276 |
Victoriya Smirnova1,2, Regina Khamatnurova3, Nikita Kharin2,4, Elena Yaikova5, Tatiana Baltina6, Oskar Sachenkov2,7.
Abstract
The quality of modern measuring instruments has a strong influence on the speed of diagnosing diseases of the human musculoskeletal system. The research is focused on automatization of the method of gait analysis. The study involved six healthy subjects. The subjects walk straight. Each subject made several gait types: casual walking and imitation of a non-standard gait, including shuffling, lameness, clubfoot, walking from the heel, rolling from heel to toe, walking with hands in pockets, and catwalk. Each type of gait was recorded three times. For video fixation, the Vicon Nexus system was used. A total of 27 reflective markers were placed on the special anatomical regions. The goniometry methods were used. The walk data were divided by steps and by step phases. Kinematic parameters for estimation were formulated and calculated. An approach for data clusterization is presented. For this purpose, angle data were interpolated and the interpolation coefficients were used for clustering the data. The data were processed and four cluster groups were found. Typical angulograms for cluster groups were presented. For each group, average angles were calculated. A statistically significant difference was found between received cluster groups.Entities:
Keywords: Vicon; clustering high-dimensional data; gait; machine learning; step phases
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36236276 PMCID: PMC9571292 DOI: 10.3390/s22197178
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Arrangement of cameras on the working area.
Figure 2Visualization of the skeleton in the program Vicon Nexus 2.9.3.
Figure 3Change in the hip angle in swing phase (a), stance phase (b).
Figure 4Change in the knee angle in swing phase (a), stance phase (b).
Figure 5Cluster visualization for four groups.
Cluster groups results.
| Group | Hip Angle | Knee Angle | Subject ID | Gait Type ID | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Swing, ° | Stance, ° | Swing, ° | Stance, ° | |||
| 1 | 169 ± 2 | 168 ± 2 | 153 ± 4 | 163 ± 4 | F1, M1, M2 | T2, T6, T8 |
| 2 | 161 ± 3 | 161 ± 2 | 150 ± 4 | 161 ± 5 | F2 | T3, T8 |
| 3 | 155 ± 5 | 161 ± 4 | 139 ± 8 | 153 ± 5 | F3 | T2 |
| 4 | 165 ± 4 | 167 ± 3 | 147 ± 5 | 161 ± 4 | M1, M2, M3 | T1, T9 |
Figure 6Data distribution in clusters: (a) hip angle value (°) in the swing phase, (b) hip angle value (°) in the stance phase, (c) knee angle value (°) in the swing phase, (d) knee angle value (°) in the stance phase; significantly difference pairs are marked by *, outliers marked by +.
Figure 7Changes in the hip and knee angles (°) in phases for clusters: (a) hip angle in the swing phase, (b) hip angle in the stance phase, (c) knee angle in the swing phase, (d) knee angle in the stance phase. Color designations: red—1 group, blue—2 group, black—3 group, green—4 group.
Figure 8Constructing a triangle.