Dataset Information

Can We Accurately Measure Axial Segment Coordination during Turning Using Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs)?

ABSTRACT: Camera-based 3D motion analysis systems are considered to be the gold standard for movement analysis. However, using such equipment in a clinical setting is prohibitive due to the expense and time-consuming nature of data collection and analysis. Therefore, Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) have been suggested as an alternative to measure movement in clinical settings. One area which is both important and challenging is the assessment of turning kinematics in individuals with movement disorders. This study aimed to validate the use of IMUs in the measurement of turning kinematics in healthy adults compared to a camera-based 3D motion analysis system. Data were collected from twelve participants using a Vicon motion analysis system which were compared with data from four IMUs placed on the forehead, middle thorax, and feet in order to determine accuracy and reliability. The results demonstrated that the IMU sensors produced reliable kinematic measures and showed excellent reliability (ICCs 0.80-0.98) and no significant differences were seen in paired t-tests in all parameters when comparing the two systems. This suggests that the IMU sensors provide a viable alternative to camera-based motion capture that could be used in isolation to gather data from individuals with movement disorders in clinical settings and real-life situations.

SUBMITTER: Khobkhun F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7249140 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can We Accurately Measure Axial Segment Coordination during Turning Using Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs)?

Khobkhun Fuengfa F Hollands Mark A MA Richards Jim J Ajjimaporn Amornpan A

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 20200429 9

Camera-based 3D motion analysis systems are considered to be the gold standard for movement analysis. However, using such equipment in a clinical setting is prohibitive due to the expense and time-consuming nature of data collection and analysis. Therefore, Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) have been suggested as an alternative to measure movement in clinical settings. One area which is both important and challenging is the assessment of turning kinematics in individuals with movement disorders. ...[more]

PMID: 32365573

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWalking patterns can provide important indications of a person's health status and be beneficial in the early diagnosis of individuals with a potential walking disorder. For appropriate gait analysis, it is critical that natural functional walking characteristics are captured, rather than those experienced in artificial or observed settings. To better understand the extent to which setting influences gait patterns, and particularly whether observation plays a varying role on subjects of different ages, the current study investigates to what extent people walk differently in lab versus real-world environments and whether age dependencies exist.MethodsThe walking patterns of 20 young and 20 elderly healthy subjects were recorded with five wearable inertial measurement units (ZurichMOVE sensors) attached to both ankles, both wrists and the chest. An automated detection process based on dynamic time warping was developed to efficiently identify the relevant sequences. From the ZurichMOVE recordings, 15 spatio-temporal gait parameters were extracted, analyzed and compared between motion patterns captured in a controlled lab environment (10 m walking test) and the non-controlled ecologically valid real-world environment (72 h recording) in both groups.ResultsSeveral parameters (Cluster A) showed significant differences between the two environments for both groups, including an increased outward foot rotation, step width, number of steps per 180° turn, stance to swing ratio, and cycle time deviation in the real-world. A number of parameters (Cluster B) showed only significant differences between the two environments for elderly subjects, including a decreased gait velocity (p = 0.0072), decreased cadence (p = 0.0051) and increased cycle time (p = 0.0051) in real-world settings. Importantly, the real-world environment increased the differences in several parameters between the young and elderly groups.ConclusionElderly test subjects walked differently in controlled lab settings compared to their real-world environments, which indicates the need to better understand natural walking patterns under ecologically valid conditions before clinically relevant conclusions can be drawn on a subject's functional status. Moreover, the greater inter-group differences in real-world environments seem promising regarding the sensitive identification of subjects with indications of a walking disorder.

Project description:Background: Objective gait assessment is key for the follow-up of patients with progressive multiple sclerosis (pMS). Inertial measurement units (IMUs) provide reliable and yet easy quantitative gait assessment in routine clinical settings. However, to the best of our knowledge, no automated step-detection algorithm performs well in detecting severely altered pMS gait. Method: This article elaborates on a step-detection method based on personalized templates tested against a gold standard. Twenty-two individuals with pMS and 10 young healthy subjects (HSs) were instructed to walk on an electronic walkway wearing synchronized IMUs. Templates were derived from the IMU signals by using Initial and Final Contact times given by the walkway. These were used to detect steps from other gait trials of the same individual (intra-individual template-based detection, IITD) or another participant from the same group (pMS or HS) (intra-group template-based detection, IGTD). All participants were seen twice with a 6-month interval, with two measurements performed at each visit. Performance and accuracy metrics were computed, along with a similarity index (SId), which was computed as the mean distance between detected steps and their respective closest template. Results: For HS participants, both the IITD and the IGTD algorithms had precision and recall of 1.00 for detecting steps. For pMS participants, precision and recall ranged from 0.94 to 1.00 for IITD and 0.85 to 0.95 for IGTD depending on the level of disability. The SId was correlated with performance and the accuracy of the result. An SId threshold of 0.957 (IITD) and 0.963 (IGTD) could rule out decreased performance (F-measure ? 0.95), with negative predictive values of 0.99 and 0.96 with the IITD and IGTD algorithms. Also, the SId computed with the IITD and IGTD algorithms could distinguish individuals showing changes at 6-month follow-up. Conclusion: This personalized step-detection method has high performance for detecting steps in pMS individuals with severely altered gait. The algorithm can be self-evaluating with the SI, which gives a measure of the confidence the clinician can have in the detection. What is more, the SId can be used as a biomarker of change in disease severity occurring between the two measurement times.

Dataset Information

Can We Accurately Measure Axial Segment Coordination during Turning Using Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs)?

Publications

Can We Accurately Measure Axial Segment Coordination during Turning Using Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs)?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets