Validation of Body-Worn Sensors for Gait Analysis During a 2-min Walk Test in Children.

Vincent Shieh, Cris Zampieri, Ashwini Sansare, John Collins, Thomas C Bulea, Minal Jain
{"title":"Validation of Body-Worn Sensors for Gait Analysis During a 2-min Walk Test in Children.","authors":"Vincent Shieh,&nbsp;Cris Zampieri,&nbsp;Ashwini Sansare,&nbsp;John Collins,&nbsp;Thomas C Bulea,&nbsp;Minal Jain","doi":"10.1123/jmpb.2021-0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Instrumented gait mat systems have been regarded as one of the gold standard methods for measuring spatiotemporal gait parameters. However, their portable walkways confine walking to a restricted area and limit the number of gait cycles collected. Wearable inertial sensors are a potential alternative that allow more natural walking behavior and have fewer space restrictions. The objective of this pilot study was to establish the concurrent validity of body-worn sensors against the portable walkway system in older children.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-one participants (10 males) 7-17 years old performed 2-min walk tests at a self-selected and fast pace in a 25-m-long hallway, while wearing three inertial sensors. Data collection were synchronized between devices and the portions of the walk when subjects passed on the walkway were used to compare gait speed, stride length, gait cycle duration, cadence, and double support time. Regression models and Bland-Altman analysis were completed to determine agreement between systems for the selected gait parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Gait speed, cadence, gait cycle duration, and stride length as measured by inertial sensors demonstrated strong agreement overall. Double support time was found to have lower validity due to a combined bias of age, height, weight, and walking pace.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results support the validity of wearable inertial sensors in measuring gait speed, cadence, gait cycle duration, and stride length in children 7 years old and above during a 2-min walking test. Future studies are warranted with a broader age range to thoroughly represent the pediatric population.</p>","PeriodicalId":73572,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10398795/pdf/nihms-1915200.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2021-0035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Instrumented gait mat systems have been regarded as one of the gold standard methods for measuring spatiotemporal gait parameters. However, their portable walkways confine walking to a restricted area and limit the number of gait cycles collected. Wearable inertial sensors are a potential alternative that allow more natural walking behavior and have fewer space restrictions. The objective of this pilot study was to establish the concurrent validity of body-worn sensors against the portable walkway system in older children.

Methods: Twenty-one participants (10 males) 7-17 years old performed 2-min walk tests at a self-selected and fast pace in a 25-m-long hallway, while wearing three inertial sensors. Data collection were synchronized between devices and the portions of the walk when subjects passed on the walkway were used to compare gait speed, stride length, gait cycle duration, cadence, and double support time. Regression models and Bland-Altman analysis were completed to determine agreement between systems for the selected gait parameters.

Results: Gait speed, cadence, gait cycle duration, and stride length as measured by inertial sensors demonstrated strong agreement overall. Double support time was found to have lower validity due to a combined bias of age, height, weight, and walking pace.

Conclusion: These results support the validity of wearable inertial sensors in measuring gait speed, cadence, gait cycle duration, and stride length in children 7 years old and above during a 2-min walking test. Future studies are warranted with a broader age range to thoroughly represent the pediatric population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童2分钟步行试验中用于步态分析的穿戴式传感器的验证。
仪器化步态垫系统已被认为是测量时空步态参数的金标准方法之一。然而,他们的便携式步道限制行走在一个有限的区域,并限制了步态周期收集的数量。可穿戴惯性传感器是一种潜在的替代方案,它允许更自然的行走行为,而且空间限制更少。本初步研究的目的是在年龄较大的儿童中建立身体穿戴传感器与便携式步行系统的同时有效性。方法:21名参与者(10名男性),年龄7-17岁,在25米长的走廊上以自主选择的快节奏进行2分钟步行测试,同时佩戴三个惯性传感器。当受试者通过人行道时,数据收集在设备和步行部分之间进行同步,用于比较步态速度、步幅、步态周期持续时间、节奏和双支撑时间。完成了回归模型和Bland-Altman分析,以确定所选步态参数在系统之间的一致性。结果:惯性传感器测量的步态速度、节奏、步态周期持续时间和步幅总体上表现出很强的一致性。由于年龄、身高、体重和步行速度的综合偏倚,双支撑时间的效度较低。结论:这些结果支持可穿戴惯性传感器在7岁及以上儿童2分钟步行测试中测量步态速度、节奏、步态周期持续时间和步幅长度的有效性。未来的研究需要更广泛的年龄范围,以彻底代表儿科人群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Influence of Accelerometer Calibration on the Estimation of Objectively Measured Physical Activity: The Tromsø Study Criterion Validity of Accelerometers in Determining Knee-Flexion Angles During Sitting in a Laboratory Setting Comparability of 24-hr Activity Cycle Outputs From ActiGraph Counts Generated in ActiLife and RStudio Comparison of Sleep and Physical Activity Metrics From Wrist-Worn ActiGraph wGT3X-BT and GT9X Accelerometers During Free-Living in Adults Pre- Versus Postmeal Sedentary Duration—Impact on Postprandial Glucose in Older Adults With Overweight or Obesity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1