Background

Measuring gait function has become an essential tool in the assessment of mobility in aging populations for both, clinicians and researchers. A variety of systems exist that assess gait parameters such as gait cycle time, gait speed or duration of relative gait phases. Due to different measurement principles such as inertial or pressure sensors, accurate detection of spatiotemporal events may vary between systems.

Research question

To compare the absolute agreement and consistency in spatiotemporal gait parameters among five different clinical gait analysis systems using different sensor technologies.

Methods

We compared two devices using inertial sensors (GaitUp & Mobility Lab), two devices using pressure sensor systems (GAITRite & Zebris) as well as one optical system (OptoGait). Twelve older adults walked at self-selected speed through a walkway integrating all of the above systems. Basic spatiotemporal parameters (gait cycle time, cadence, gait speed and stride length) as well as measures of relative phase (stance phase, swing phase, double stance phase, single limb support) were extracted from all systems. We used Intraclass Correlation Coefficients as measures of agreement and consistency.

Results

High agreement and consistency between all systems was found for basic spatiotemporal parameters, whereas parameters of relative phase showed poorer agreement and consistency. Overground measurement (GAITRite & OptoGait) showed generally higher agreement with each other as compared to inertial sensor-based systems.

Significance

Our results indicate that accurate detection of both, the heel-strike and toe-off event are crucial for reliable results. Systematic errors in the detection of one or both events may only have a small impact on basic spatiotemporal outcomes as errors remain consistent from step to step. Relative phase parameters on the other hand may be affected to a much larger extent as these differences lead to a systematic increase or reduction of relative phase durations.

中文翻译：

---

五种不同临床步态分析系统在时空步态参数评估中的一致性和一致性

背景

步态功能的测量已成为临床医生和研究人员评估老年人口活动能力的重要工具。存在多种评估步态参数的系统，例如步态周期时间，步态速度或相对步态阶段的持续时间。由于惯性传感器或压力传感器等不同的测量原理，系统之间时空事件的准确检测可能会有所不同。

研究问题

为了比较使用不同传感器技术的五个不同临床步态分析系统之间的时空步态参数的绝对一致性和一致性。

方法

我们比较了使用惯性传感器的两种设备（GaitUp＆Mobility Lab），使用压力传感器系统的两种设备（GAITRite＆Zebris）以及一种光学系统（OptoGait）。十二名成年人以自行选择的速度走过集成了上述所有系统的人行道。从所有系统中提取基本的时空参数（步态周期时间，节奏，步态速度和步幅长度）以及相对相位（姿势相位，挥杆相位，双姿势相位，单肢支撑）的度量。我们使用类内相关系数作为一致性和一致性的度量。

结果

基本时空参数在所有系统之间都具有较高的一致性和一致性，而相对相位的参数则具有较差的一致性和一致性。与基于惯性传感器的系统相比，地面测量（GAITRite和OptoGait）通常显示出更高的一致性。

意义

我们的结果表明，精确检测脚后跟撞击和脚趾脱落事件对于可靠结果至关重要。一次或两次事件的检测中的系统性错误可能对基本时空结局仅产生很小的影响，因为错误之间逐步保持一致。另一方面，相对相位参数可能会受到更大程度的影响，因为这些差异会导致相对相位持续时间的系统性增加或减少。