Dataset Information

Validity and reliability of wearable inertial sensors in healthy adult walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Inertial measurement units (IMUs) offer the ability to measure walking gait through a variety of biomechanical outcomes (e.g., spatiotemporal, kinematics, other). Although many studies have assessed their validity and reliability, there remains no quantitive summary of this vast body of literature. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the i) concurrent validity and ii) test-retest reliability of IMUs for measuring biomechanical gait outcomes during level walking in healthy adults. METHODS:Five electronic databases were searched for journal articles assessing the validity or reliability of IMUs during healthy adult walking. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for studies to be included, before two reviewers examined the methodological quality of all included studies. When sufficient data were present for a given biomechanical outcome, data were meta-analyzed on Pearson correlation coefficients (r) or intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for validity and reliability, respectively. Alternatively, qualitative summaries of outcomes were conducted on those that could not be meta-analyzed. RESULTS:A total of 82 articles, assessing the validity or reliability of over 100 outcomes, were included in this review. Seventeen biomechanical outcomes, primarily spatiotemporal parameters, were meta-analyzed. The validity and reliability of step and stride times were found to be excellent. Similarly, the validity and reliability of step and stride length, as well as swing and stance time, were found to be good to excellent. Alternatively, spatiotemporal parameter variability and symmetry displayed poor to moderate validity and reliability. IMUs were also found to display moderate reliability for the assessment of local dynamic stability during walking. The remaining biomechanical outcomes were qualitatively summarized to provide a variety of recommendations for future IMU research. CONCLUSIONS:The findings of this review demonstrate the excellent validity and reliability of IMUs for mean spatiotemporal parameters during walking, but caution the use of spatiotemporal variability and symmetry metrics without strict protocol. Further, this work tentatively supports the use of IMUs for joint angle measurement and other biomechanical outcomes such as stability, regularity, and segmental accelerations. Unfortunately, the strength of these recommendations are limited based on the lack of high-quality studies for each outcome, with underpowered and/or unjustified sample sizes (sample size median 12; range: 2-95) being the primary limitation.

SUBMITTER: Kobsar D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7216606 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validity and reliability of wearable inertial sensors in healthy adult walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kobsar Dylan D Charlton Jesse M JM Tse Calvin T F CTF Esculier Jean-Francois JF Graffos Angelo A Krowchuk Natasha M NM Thatcher Daniel D Hunt Michael A MA

Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation 20200511 1

<h4>Background</h4>Inertial measurement units (IMUs) offer the ability to measure walking gait through a variety of biomechanical outcomes (e.g., spatiotemporal, kinematics, other). Although many studies have assessed their validity and reliability, there remains no quantitive summary of this vast body of literature. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the i) concurrent validity and ii) test-retest reliability of IMUs for measuring biomechanical gait ...[more]

PMID: 32393301

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe anterior-posterior ground reaction force (AP-GRF) and propulsion and braking point metrics derived from the AP-GRF time series are indicators of locomotor function across healthy and neurological diagnostic groups. In this paper, we describe the use of a minimal set of wearable inertial measurement units (IMUs) to indirectly measure the AP-GRFs generated during healthy and hemiparetic walking.MethodsTen healthy individuals and five individuals with chronic post-stroke hemiparesis completed a 6-minute walk test over a walking track instrumented with six forceplates while wearing three IMUs securely attached to the pelvis, thigh, and shank. Subject-specific models driven by IMU-measured thigh and shank angles and an estimate of body acceleration provided by the pelvis IMU were used to generate indirect estimates of the AP-GRF time series. Propulsion and braking point metrics (i.e., peaks, peak timings, and impulses) were extracted from the IMU-generated time series. Peaks and impulses were expressed as % bodyweight (%bw) and peak timing was expressed as % stance phase (%sp). A 75%-25% split of 6-minute walk test data was used to train and validate the models. Indirect estimates of the AP-GRF time series and point metrics were compared to direct measurements made by the forceplates.ResultsIndirect measurements of the AP-GRF time series approximated the direct measurements made by forceplates, with low error and high consistency in both the healthy (RMSE= 4.5%bw; R2= 0.93) and post-stroke (RMSE= 2.64%bw; R2= 0.90) cohorts. In the healthy cohort, the average errors between indirect and direct measurements of the peak propulsion magnitude, peak propulsion timing, and propulsion impulse point estimates were 2.37%bw, 0.67%sp, and 0.43%bw. In the post-stroke cohort, the average errors for these point estimates were 1.07%bw, 1.27%sp, and 0.31%bw. Average errors for the braking estimates were higher, but comparable.ConclusionsAccurate estimates of AP-GRF metrics can be generated using three strategically mounted IMUs and subject-specific calibrations. This study advances the development of point-of-care diagnostic systems that can catalyze the routine assessment and management of propulsion and braking locomotor deficits during rehabilitation.

Project description:BackgroundElbow and wrist chronic conditions are very common among musculoskeletal problems. These painful conditions affect muscle function, which ultimately leads to a decrease in the joint's Range Of Motion (ROM). Due to their portability and ease of use, goniometers are still the most widespread tool for measuring ROM. Inertial sensors are emerging as a digital, low-cost and accurate alternative. However, whereas inertial sensors are commonly used in research studies, due to the lack of information about their validity and reliability, they are not widely used in the clinical practice. The goal of this study is to assess the validity and intra-inter-rater reliability of inertial sensors for measuring active ROM of the elbow and wrist.Materials and methodsMeasures were taken simultaneously with inertial sensors (Werium™ system) and a universal goniometer. The process involved two physiotherapists ("rater A" and "rater B") and an engineer responsible for the technical issues. Twenty-nine asymptomatic subjects were assessed individually in two sessions separated by 48 h. The procedure was repeated by rater A followed by rater B with random order. Three repetitions of each active movement (elbow flexion, pronation, and supination; and wrist flexion, extension, radial deviation and ulnar deviation) were executed starting from the neutral position until the ROM end-feel; that is, until ROM reached its maximum due to be stopped by the anatomy. The coefficient of determination (r 2) and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) were calculated to assess the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. The Standard Error of the Measurement and the Minimum Detectable Change and a Bland-Altman plots were also calculated.ResultsSimilar ROM values when measured with both instruments were obtained for the elbow (maximum difference of 3° for all the movements) and wrist (maximum difference of 1° for all the movements). These values were within the normal range when compared to literature studies. The concurrent validity analysis for all the movements yielded ICC values ≥0.78 for the elbow and ≥0.95 for the wrist. Concerning reliability, the ICC values denoted a high reliability of inertial sensors for all the different movements. In the case of the elbow, intra-rater and inter-rater reliability ICC values range from 0.83 to 0.96 and from 0.94 to 0.97, respectively. Intra-rater analysis of the wrist yielded ICC values between 0.81 and 0.93, while the ICC values for the inter-rater analysis range from 0.93 to 0.99.ConclusionsInertial sensors are a valid and reliable tool for measuring elbow and wrist active ROM. Particularly noteworthy is their high inter-rater reliability, often questioned in measurement tools. The lowest reliability is observed in elbow prono-supination, probably due to skin artifacts. Based on these results and their advantages, inertial sensors can be considered a valid assessment tool for wrist and elbow ROM.

Project description:BackgroundInertial measurement units (IMUs) are useful in monitoring running and alerting running-related injuries in various sports settings. However, the quantitative summaries of the validity and reliability of the measurements from IMUs during running are still lacking. The purpose of this review was to investigate the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of IMUs for measuring gait spatiotemporal outcomes and lower extremity kinematics of health adults during running.MethodsPubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science electronic databases were searched from inception until September 2021. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) evaluated the validity or reliability of measurements from IMUs, (2) measured specific kinematic outcomes, (3) compared measurements using IMUs with those obtained using reference systems, (4) collected data during running, (5) assessed human beings and (6) were published in English. Eligible articles were reviewed using a modified quality assessment. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the pooled correlation coefficients of validity and reliability.ResultsTwenty-five articles were included in the systematic review, and data from 12 were pooled for meta-analysis. The methodological quality of studies ranged from low to moderate. Concurrent validity is excellent for stride length (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (95% confidence interval (CI)) = 0.937 (0.859, 0.972), p < 0.001), step frequency (ICC (95% CI) = 0.926 (0.896, 0.948), r (95% CI) = 0.989 (0.957, 0.997), p < 0.001) and ankle angle in the sagittal plane (r (95% CI) = 0.939 (0.544, 0.993), p = 0.002), moderate to excellent for stance time (ICC (95% CI) = 0.664 (0.354, 0.845), r (95% CI) = 0.811 (0.701, 0.881), p < 0.001) and good for running speed (ICC (95% CI) = 0.848 (0.523, 0.958), p = 0.0003). The summary Fisher's Z value of flight time was not statistically significant (p = 0.13). Similarly, the stance time showed excellent test-retest reliability (ICC (95% CI) = 0.954 (0.903, 0.978), p < 0.001) and step frequency showed good test-retest reliability (ICC (95% CI) = 0.896 (0.837, 0.933), p < 0.001).ConclusionsFindings in the current review support IMUs measurement of running gait spatiotemporal parameters, but IMUs measurement of running kinematics on lower extremity joints needs to be reported with caution in healthy adults.Trial registrationPROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42021279395.

Dataset Information

Validity and reliability of wearable inertial sensors in healthy adult walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Validity and reliability of wearable inertial sensors in healthy adult walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets