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.

No abstract

BackgroundFemales have a two-fold risk of developing knee osteoarthritis (OA) as compared to their male counterparts and atypical walking gait biomechanics are also considered a factor in the aetiology of knee OA. However, few studies have investigated sex-related differences in walking mechanics for patients with knee OA and of those, conflicting results have been reported. Therefore, this study was designed to examine the differences in gait kinematics (1) between male and female subjects with and without knee OA and (2) between healthy gender-matched subjects as compared with their OA counterparts.MethodsOne hundred subjects with knee OA (45 males and 55 females) and 43 healthy subjects (18 males and 25 females) participated in this study. Three-dimensional kinematic data were collected during treadmill-walking and analysed using (1) a traditional approach based on discrete variables and (2) a machine learning approach based on principal component analysis (PCA) and support vector machine (SVM) using waveform data.ResultsOA and healthy females exhibited significantly greater knee abduction and hip adduction angles compared to their male counterparts. No significant differences were found in any discrete gait kinematic variable between OA and healthy subjects in either the male or female group. Using PCA and SVM approaches, classification accuracies of 98–100 % were found between gender groups as well as between OA groups.ConclusionsThese results suggest that care should be taken to account for gender when investigating the biomechanical aetiology of knee OA and that gender-specific analysis and rehabilitation protocols should be developed.

The purpose of this study was to classify runners in sex-specific groups as either competitive or recreational based on center of mass (CoM) accelerations. Forty-one runners participated in the study (25 male and 16 female), and were labeled as competitive or recreational based on age, sex, and race performance. Three-dimensional acceleration data were collected during a 5-minute treadmill run, and 24 features were extracted. Support vector machine classification models were used to examine the utility of the features in discriminating between competitive and recreational runners within each sex-specific subgroup. Competitive and recreational runners could be classified with 82.63 % and 80.4 % in the male and female models, respectively. Dominant features in both models were related to regularity and variability, with competitive runners exhibiting more consistent running gait patterns, but the specific features were slightly different in each sex-specific model. Therefore, it is important to separate runners into sex-specific competitive and recreational subgroups for future running biomechanical studies. In conclusion, we have demonstrated the ability to analyze running biomechanics in competitive and recreational runners using only CoM acceleration patterns. A runner, clinician, or coach may use this information to monitor how running patterns change as a result of training.

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.

BackgroundMuscle strengthening exercises consistently demonstrate improvements in the pain and function of adults with knee osteoarthritis, but individual response rates can vary greatly. Identifying individuals who are more likely to respond is important in developing more efficient rehabilitation programs for knee osteoarthritis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if pre-intervention multi-sensor accelerometer data (e.g., back, thigh, shank, foot accelerometers) and patient reported outcome measures (e.g., pain, symptoms, function, quality of life) can retrospectively predict post-intervention response to a 6-week hip strengthening exercise intervention in a knee OA cohort.MethodsThirty-nine adults with knee osteoarthritis completed a 6-week hip strengthening exercise intervention and were sub-grouped as Non-Responders, Low-Responders, or High-Responders following the intervention based on their change in patient reported outcome measures. Pre-intervention multi-sensor accelerometer data recorded at the back, thigh, shank, and foot and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscale data were used as potential predictors of response in a discriminant analysis of principal components.ResultsThe thigh was the single best placement for classifying responder sub-groups (74.4%). Overall, the best combination of sensors was the back, thigh, and shank (81.7%), but a simplified two sensor solution using the back and thigh was not significantly different (80.0%; p = 0.27).ConclusionsWhile three sensors were best able to identify responders, a simplified two sensor array at the back and thigh may be the most ideal configuration to provide clinicians with an efficient and relatively unobtrusive way to use to optimize treatment.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-017-0309-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

ObjectiveMuscle strengthening exercises have been shown to improve pain and function in adults with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis, but individual response rates can vary greatly. Predicting individuals who respond and those who do not is important in developing a more efficient and effective model of care for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to use pre-intervention gait kinematics and patient-reported outcome measures to predict post-intervention response to a 6-week hip strengthening exercise intervention in patients with mild-to-moderate knee OA.MethodsThirty-nine patients with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis completed a 6-week hip-strengthening program and were subgrouped as Non-Responders, Low-Responders, or High-Responders following the intervention based on their change in Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Predictors of responder subgroups were retrospectively determined from baseline patient-reported outcome measures and kinematic gait parameters in a discriminant analysis of principal components. A 3–4 year follow-up on 16 of the patients with knee OA was also done to examine long-term changes in these parameters.ResultsA unique combination of patient-reported outcome measures and kinematic factors was able to successfully subgroup patients with knee osteoarthritis with a cross-validated classification accuracy of 85.4%. Lower patient-reported function in daily living (ADL) scores and hip frontal plane kinematics during the loading response were most important in classifying High-Responders from other sub-groups, while a combination of hip, knee, ankle kinematics were used to classify Non-Responders from Low-Responders.ConclusionPatient-reported outcome measures and objective biomechanical gait data can be an effective method of predicting individual treatment success to an exercise intervention. Measuring gait kinematics, along with patient-reported outcome measures in a clinical setting can be useful in helping make evidence-based decisions regarding optimal treatment for patients with knee OA.