Dataset Information

Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis in Adults with Osteoarthritis-A Scoping Review.

ABSTRACT: Our objective was to conduct a scoping review which summarizes the growing body of literature using wearable inertial sensors for gait analysis in lower limb osteoarthritis. We searched six databases using predetermined search terms which highlighted the broad areas of inertial sensors, gait, and osteoarthritis. Two authors independently conducted title and abstract reviews, followed by two authors independently completing full-text screenings. Study quality was also assessed by two independent raters and data were extracted by one reviewer in areas such as study design, osteoarthritis sample, protocols, and inertial sensor outcomes. A total of 72 articles were included, which studied the gait of 2159 adults with osteoarthritis (OA) using inertial sensors. The most common location of OA studied was the knee (n = 46), followed by the hip (n = 22), and the ankle (n = 7). The back (n = 41) and the shank (n = 40) were the most common placements for inertial sensors. The three most prevalent biomechanical outcomes studied were: mean spatiotemporal parameters (n = 45), segment or joint angles (n = 33), and linear acceleration magnitudes (n = 22). Our findings demonstrate exceptional growth in this field in the last 5 years. Nevertheless, there remains a need for more longitudinal study designs, patient-specific models, free-living assessments, and a push for "Code Reuse" to maximize the unique capabilities of these devices and ultimately improve how we diagnose and treat this debilitating disease.

SUBMITTER: Kobsar D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7763184 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis in Adults with Osteoarthritis-A Scoping Review.

Kobsar Dylan D Masood Zaryan Z Khan Heba H Khalil Noha N Kiwan Marium Yossri MY Ridd Sarah S Tobis Matthew M

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 20201213 24

Our objective was to conduct a scoping review which summarizes the growing body of literature using wearable inertial sensors for gait analysis in lower limb osteoarthritis. We searched six databases using predetermined search terms which highlighted the broad areas of inertial sensors, gait, and osteoarthritis. Two authors independently conducted title and abstract reviews, followed by two authors independently completing full-text screenings. Study quality was also assessed by two independent ...[more]

PMID: 33322187

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAxial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) can lead to spinal mobility restrictions associated with restricted lower limb ranges of motion, thoracic kyphosis, spinopelvic ankylosis, or decrease in muscle strength. It is well known that these factors can have consequences on spatiotemporal gait parameters during walking. However, no study has assessed spatiotemporal gait parameters in patients with axSpA. Divergent results have been obtained in the studies assessing spatiotemporal gait parameters in ankylosing spondylitis, a subgroup of axSpA, which could be partly explained by self-reported pain intensity scores at time of assessment. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are increasingly popular and may facilitate gait assessment in clinical practice.ObjectiveThis study compared spatiotemporal gait parameters assessed with foot-worn IMUs in patients with axSpA and matched healthy individuals without and with pain intensity score as a covariate.MethodsA total of 30 patients with axSpA and 30 age- and sex-matched healthy controls performed a 10-m walk test at comfortable speed. Various spatiotemporal gait parameters were computed from foot-worn inertial sensors including gait speed in ms-1 (mean walking velocity), cadence in steps/minute (number of steps in a minute), stride length in m (distance between 2 consecutive footprints of the same foot on the ground), swing time in percentage (portion of the cycle during which the foot is in the air), stance time in percentage (portion of the cycle during which part of the foot touches the ground), and double support time in percentage (portion of the cycle where both feet touch the ground).ResultsAge, height, and weight were not significantly different between groups. Self-reported pain intensity was significantly higher in patients with axSpA than healthy controls (P<.001). Independent sample t tests indicated that patients with axSpA presented lower gait speed (P<.001) and cadence (P=.004), shorter stride length (P<.001) and swing time (P<.001), and longer double support time (P<.001) and stance time (P<.001) than healthy controls. When using pain intensity as a covariate, spatiotemporal gait parameters were still significant with patients with axSpA exhibiting lower gait speed (P<.001), shorter stride length (P=.001) and swing time (P<.001), and longer double support time (P<.001) and stance time (P<.001) than matched healthy controls. Interestingly, there were no longer statistically significant between-group differences observed for the cadence (P=.17).ConclusionsGait was significantly altered in patients with axSpA with reduced speed, cadence, stride length, and swing time and increased double support and stance time. Taken together, these changes in spatiotemporal gait parameters could be interpreted as the adoption of a so-called cautious gait pattern in patients with axSpA. Among factors that may influence gait in patients with axSpA, patient self-reported pain intensity could play a role. Finally, IMUs allowed computation of spatiotemporal gait parameters and are usable to assess gait in patients with axSpA in clinical routine.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03761212; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03761212.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1007/s00296-019-04396-4.

Project description: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.

Project description:AIM:The main purpose of the present study was to verify the feasibility of wearable inertial sensors (IMUs) in a clinical setting to screen gait and functional mobility in Italian older persons. In particular, we intended to verify the capability of IMUs to discriminate individuals with and without cognitive impairments and assess the existence of significant correlations between mobility parameters extracted by processing trunk accelerations and cognitive status. METHODS:This is a cross-sectional study performed on 213 adults aged over 65 years (mean age 77.0?±?5.4; 62% female) who underwent cognitive assessment (through Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination Revised, ACE-R) instrumental gait analysis and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test carried out using a wearable IMU located in the lower back. RESULTS:Individuals with cognitive impairments exhibit a peculiar gait pattern, characterized by significant reduction of speed (-?34% vs. healthy individuals), stride length (-?28%), cadence (-?9%), and increase in double support duration (+?11%). Slight, but significant changes in stance and swing phase duration were also detected. Poorer performances in presence of cognitive impairment were observed in terms of functional mobility as overall and sub-phase TUG times resulted significantly higher with respect to healthy individuals (overall time,?+?38%, sub-phases times ranging from?+?22 to?+?34%), although with some difference associated with age. The severity of mobility alterations was found moderately to strongly correlated with the ACE-R score (Spearman's rho?=?0.58 vs. gait speed, 0.54 vs. stride length, 0.66 vs. overall TUG time). CONCLUSION:The findings obtained in the present study suggest that wearable IMUs appear to be an effective solution for the clinical assessment of mobility parameters of older persons screened for cognitive impairments within a clinical setting. They may represent a useful tool for the clinician in verifying the effectiveness of interventions to alleviate the impact of mobility limitations on daily life in cognitively impaired individuals.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough it is well-established that osteoarthritis (OA) impairs daily-life gait, objective gait assessments are not part of routine clinical evaluation. Wearable inertial sensors provide an easily accessible and fast way to routinely evaluate gait quality in clinical settings. However, during these assessments, more complex and meaningful aspects of daily-life gait, including turning, dual-task performance, and upper body motion, are often overlooked. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate turning, dual-task performance, and upper body motion in individuals with knee or hip OA in addition to more commonly assessed spatiotemporal gait parameters using wearable sensors.MethodsGait was compared between individuals with unilateral knee (n = 25) or hip OA (n = 26) scheduled for joint replacement, and healthy controls (n = 27). For 2 min, participants walked back and forth along a 6-m trajectory making 180° turns, with and without a secondary cognitive task. Gait parameters were collected using 4 inertial measurement units on the feet and trunk. To test if dual-task gait, turning, and upper body motion had added value above spatiotemporal parameters, a factor analysis was conducted. Effect sizes were computed as standardized mean difference between OA groups and healthy controls to identify parameters from these gait domains that were sensitive to knee or hip OA.ResultsFour independent domains of gait were obtained: speed-spatial, speed-temporal, dual-task cost, and upper body motion. Turning parameters constituted a gait domain together with cadence. From the domains that were obtained, stride length (speed-spatial) and cadence (speed-temporal) had the strongest effect sizes for both knee and hip OA. Upper body motion (lumbar sagittal range of motion), showed a strong effect size when comparing hip OA with healthy controls. Parameters reflecting dual-task cost were not sensitive to knee or hip OA.ConclusionsBesides more commonly reported spatiotemporal parameters, only upper body motion provided non-redundant and sensitive parameters representing gait adaptations in individuals with hip OA. Turning parameters were sensitive to knee and hip OA, but were not independent from speed-related gait parameters. Dual-task parameters had limited additional value for evaluating gait in knee and hip OA, although dual-task cost constituted a separate gait domain. Future steps should include testing responsiveness of these gait domains to interventions aiming to improve mobility.

Dataset Information

Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis in Adults with Osteoarthritis-A Scoping Review.

Publications

Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis in Adults with Osteoarthritis-A Scoping Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets