Reliability of patient-specific gait profiles with inertial measurement units during the 2-min walk test in incomplete spinal cord injury.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Feb 2024
06 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
12
02
2023
accepted:
30
01
2024
medline:
7
2
2024
pubmed:
7
2
2024
entrez:
6
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Most established clinical walking tests assess specific aspects of movement function (velocity, endurance, etc.) but are generally unable to determine specific biomechanical or neurological deficits that limit an individual's ability to walk. Recently, inertial measurement units (IMU) have been used to collect objective kinematic data for gait analysis and could be a valuable extension for clinical assessments (e.g., functional walking measures). This study assesses the reliability of an IMU-based overground gait analysis during the 2-min walk test (2mWT) in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Furthermore, the study elaborates on the capability of IMUs to distinguish between different gait characteristics in individuals with SCI. Twenty-six individuals (aged 22-79) with acute or chronic SCI (AIS: C and D) completed the 2mWT with IMUs attached above each ankle on 2 test days, separated by 1 to 7 days. The IMU-based gait analysis showed good to excellent test-retest reliability (ICC: 0.77-0.99) for all gait parameters. Gait profiles remained stable between two measurements. Sensor-based gait profiling was able to reveal patient-specific gait impairments even in individuals with the same walking performance in the 2mWT. IMUs are a valuable add-on to clinical gait assessments and deliver reliable information on detailed gait pathologies in individuals with SCI.Trial registration: NCT04555759.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38321085
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-53301-y
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-53301-y
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04555759']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3049Subventions
Organisme : International Foundation for Research in Paraplegia
ID : P183
Organisme : Wings for Life
ID : WFL-CH-029/17
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Mansour, J. M. & Pereira, J. M. Quantitative functional anatomy of the lower limb with application to human gait. J. Biomech. 20, 51–58 (1987).
doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(87)90266-1
pubmed: 3558428
Stolze, H. et al. Prevalence of gait disorders in hospitalized neurological patients. Mov. Disord. 20, 89–94 (2005).
doi: 10.1002/mds.20266
pubmed: 15390043
Moon, Y., Sung, J. H., An, R., Hernandez, M. E. & Sosnoff, J. J. Gait variability in people with neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum. Mov. Sci. 47, 197–208 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2016.03.010
pubmed: 27023045
Schuna, J. M. & Tudor-Locke, C. Step by step: Accumulated knowledge and future directions of step-defined ambulatory activity. Res. Exerc. Epidemiol. 14, 107–116 (2012).
Chaudhuri, A. & Behan, P. O. Fatigue in neurological disorders. Lancet 363, 978–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15794-2 (2004).
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15794-2
pubmed: 15043967
Lord, S., Galna, B. & Rochester, L. Moving forward on gait measurement: Toward a more refined approach. Mov. Disord. 28, 1534–1543. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.25545 (2013).
doi: 10.1002/mds.25545
pubmed: 24132841
Dietz, V. & Fouad, K. Restoration of sensorimotor functions after spinal cord injury. Brain 137, 654–667 (2014).
doi: 10.1093/brain/awt262
pubmed: 24103913
Rossignol, S. & Frigon, A. Recovery of locomotion after spinal cord injury: Some facts and mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 34, 413–440 (2011).
doi: 10.1146/annurev-neuro-061010-113746
pubmed: 21469957
Carcreff, L. et al. Comparison of gait characteristics between clinical and daily life settings in children with cerebral palsy. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–11 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-59002-6
Del Din, S., Godfrey, A., Galna, B., Lord, S. & Rochester, L. Free-living gait characteristics in ageing and Parkinson’s disease: Impact of environment and ambulatory bout length. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 13, 1–12 (2016).
Rehman, R. Z. U. et al. Selecting clinically relevant gait characteristics for classification of early Parkinson’s disease: A comprehensive machine learning approach. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–12 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-53656-7
Ancillao, A. Analysis and measurement of human motion: Modern protocols and clinical considerations. J. Robot. Mech. Eng. Res. 1, 30–37 (2016).
doi: 10.24218/jrmer.2016.19
Iosa, M., Picerno, P., Paolucci, S. & Morone, G. Wearable inertial sensors for human movement analysis. Expert Rev. Med. Devices 13, 641–659 (2016).
doi: 10.1080/17434440.2016.1198694
pubmed: 27309490
Picerno, P. 25 years of lower limb joint kinematics by using inertial and magnetic sensors: A review of methodological approaches. Gait Posture 51, 239–246 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.11.008
pubmed: 27833057
Mansour, K. B., Rezzoug, N. & Gorce, P. Analysis of several methods and inertial sensors locations to assess gait parameters in able-bodied subjects. Gait Posture 42, 409–414 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.05.020
pubmed: 26341531
Jakob, V. et al. Validation of a sensor-based gait analysis system with a gold-standard motion capture system in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Sensors 21, 7680 (2021).
doi: 10.3390/s21227680
pubmed: 34833755
pmcid: 8623101
Flachenecker, F. et al. Objective sensor-based gait measures reflect motor impairment in multiple sclerosis patients: Reliability and clinical validation of a wearable sensor device. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 39, 101903 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2019.101903
pubmed: 31927199
Lefeber, N., Degelaen, M., Truyers, C., Safin, I. & Beckwee, D. Validity and reproducibility of inertial physilog sensors for spatiotemporal gait analysis in patients with stroke. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 27, 1865–1874 (2019).
doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2019.2930751
pubmed: 31352347
Treacy, D. et al. Validity of different activity monitors to count steps in an inpatient rehabilitation setting. Phys. Ther. 97, 581–588 (2017).
doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzx010
pubmed: 28339904
Werner, C., Easthope, C. A., Curt, A. & Demkó, L. Towards a mobile gait analysis for patients with a spinal cord injury: A robust algorithm validated for slow walking speeds. Sensors 21, 7381 (2021).
doi: 10.3390/s21217381
pubmed: 34770686
pmcid: 8587087
Popp, W. L. et al. Wearable sensors in ambulatory individuals with a spinal cord injury: From energy expenditure estimation to activity recommendations. Front. Neurol. 10, 92 (2019).
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2019.01092
Balasubramanian, S., Melendez-Calderon, A., Roby-Brami, A. & Burdet, E. On the analysis of movement smoothness. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 12, 1–11 (2015).
doi: 10.1186/s12984-015-0090-9
Vagenas, G. K. & Hoshizaki, B. A multivariable analysis of lower extremity kinematic asymmetry in running. Int. J. Sport Biomech. 8, 11–29 (1992).
doi: 10.1123/ijsb.8.1.11
Lord, S. et al. Independent domains of gait in older adults and associated motor and nonmotor attributes: Validation of a factor analysis approach. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 68, 820–827 (2013).
doi: 10.1093/gerona/gls255
Mansour, K. B., Gorce, P. & Rezzoug, N. The multifeature gait score: An accurate way to assess gait quality. PLoS ONE 12, e0185741 (2017).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185741
pubmed: 29049403
pmcid: 5648116
Enright, P. L. The six-minute walk test. Respir. Care 48, 783 (2003).
pubmed: 12890299
Colyer, S. L., Evans, M., Cosker, D. P. & Salo, A. I. T. A review of the evolution of vision-based motion analysis and the integration of advanced computer vision methods towards developing a markerless system. Sports Med. Open 4, 1 (2018).
doi: 10.1186/s40798-018-0139-y
Koo, T. K. & Li, M. Y. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J. Chiropr. Med. 15, 155–163 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
pubmed: 27330520
pmcid: 4913118
Koo, T. K. & Li, M. Y. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J. Chiropr. Med. 15, 155 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
pubmed: 27330520
pmcid: 4913118
Atkinson, G. & Nevill, A. M. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med. 26, 217–238 (1998).
doi: 10.2165/00007256-199826040-00002
pubmed: 9820922
Flansbjer, U. B., Holmbäck, A. M., Downham, D., Patten, C. & Lexell, J. Reliability of gait performance tests in men and women with hemiparesis after stroke. J. Rehabil. Med. 37, 75–82 (2005).
doi: 10.1080/16501970410017215
pubmed: 15788341
Pacini Panebianco, G., Bisi, M. C., Stagni, R. & Fantozzi, S. Analysis of the performance of 17 algorithms from a systematic review: Influence of sensor position, analysed variable and computational approach in gait timing estimation from IMU measurements. Gait Posture 66, 76–82 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.08.025
pubmed: 30170137
Bowden, M. G. & Behrman, A. L. Step activity monitor: Accuracy and test–retest reliability in persons with incomplete spinal cord injury. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 44, 355–362 (2007).
doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2006.03.0033
pubmed: 18247232
Galna, B., Lord, S. & Rochester, L. Is gait variability reliable in older adults and Parkinson’s disease? Towards an optimal testing protocol. Gait Posture 37, 580–585 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.09.025
pubmed: 23103242
Kroneberg, D. et al. Less is more—Estimation of the number of strides required to assess gait variability in spatially confined settings. Front. Aging Neurosci. 11, 1–13 (2019).
Scivoletto, G. et al. Validity and reliability of the 10-m walk test and the 6-min walk test in spinal cord injury patients. Spinal Cord. 49, 736–740 (2011).
doi: 10.1038/sc.2010.180
pubmed: 21221120
Anderson, K. D. Targeting recovery: Priorities of the spinal cord-injured population. J. Neurotrauma 21, 1371–1383 (2004).
doi: 10.1089/neu.2004.21.1371
pubmed: 15672628
Shin, S. Y., Lee, R. K., Spicer, P. & Sulzer, J. Does kinematic gait quality improve with functional gait recovery? A longitudinal pilot study on early post-stroke individuals. J. Biomech. 105, 109761 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.109761
pubmed: 32229025
Sosnoff, J. J., Sandroff, B. M. & Motl, R. W. Quantifying gait abnormalities in persons with multiple sclerosis with minimal disability. Gait Posture 36, 154–156 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.11.027
pubmed: 22424761
Subramaniam, S., Faisal, A. I. & Deen, M. J. Wearable sensor systems for fall risk assessment: A review. Front. Digit. Health 4, 506 (2022).
doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2022.921506
Stanhope, V. A., Knarr, B. A., Reisman, D. S. & Higginson, J. S. Frontal plane compensatory strategies associated with self-selected walking speed in individuals post-stroke. Clin. Biomech. 29, 518–522 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2014.03.013
Graham, J. E., Ostir, G. V., Fisher, S. R. & Ottenbacher, K. J. Assessing walking speed in clinical research: A systematic review. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 14, 552–562 (2008).
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00917.x
pubmed: 18462283
pmcid: 2628962