These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Reliability testing of an IMU-based 2-segment foot model for clinical gait analysis.
    Author: Bauer L, Hamberger MA, Böcker W, Polzer H, Baumbach SF.
    Journal: Gait Posture; 2024 Oct; 114():112-118. PubMed ID: 39321621.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The one of the most commonly used reference system for clinical gait analysis is an optical motion capture system (OMC) using a multi-segment foot model. A time- and cost-efficient alternative could be an inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based systems. However, these are limited to a single segment approach for the foot and ankle. Therefore, the current setup was modified to be based on a 2-segment foot model, allowing for a separate analysis of the hind- and midfoot. The study aimed to evaluate the reliability (inter-rater, intra-rater, and test-retest reliability) of an IMU-based 2-segment foot model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twelve healthy subjects were recruited to test the inter-rater, intra-rater, and test-retest reliability of the new IMU based 2-segment foot model. Gait analysis was performed on a treadmill at a constant speed of 4 km/h. Kinematic data of the tibia/hindfoot, tibia/forefoot and hindfoot/forefoot over 100 % gait cycle were analyzed. The reliability was tested by using statistical parametric mapping (SPM) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The SPM showed no significant difference for inter-, intra-rater, and test-retest reliability, but for a small segment of tibia/forefoot dorsiflexion test-retest reliability (2.1° difference). The single standard deviation measurement error for the sagittal and transverse plane was <5° and worse for the frontal plane. CONCLUSION: The new 2-segment foot model revealed a high inter-rater, intra-rater, and test-retest reliability. It is suitable for use in adult clinical practice. Still, comparative data to the OMC system using a multi-segment foot model are missing.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]