2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.humov.2018.11.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamic balance assessment during gait in children with Down and Prader-Willi syndromes using inertial sensors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
20
1
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
20
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…These impairments reduce throughout life, following the improvement of postural control and movement 2,5,6,8,11,12,16,37) . In that, some change was observed during lifespan: during childhood, larger variability in gait parameters was observed 2) , and the spatiotemporal locomotor traits were consistent with the gait profile of DS patients 34) . After this age (>12 years) people with DS tend to develop strategy focused on the reduction of the degrees of freedom (ranges of motion), in an attempt to compensate for muscle weakness and gain better postural control.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These impairments reduce throughout life, following the improvement of postural control and movement 2,5,6,8,11,12,16,37) . In that, some change was observed during lifespan: during childhood, larger variability in gait parameters was observed 2) , and the spatiotemporal locomotor traits were consistent with the gait profile of DS patients 34) . After this age (>12 years) people with DS tend to develop strategy focused on the reduction of the degrees of freedom (ranges of motion), in an attempt to compensate for muscle weakness and gain better postural control.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
“…The main abnormalities regarding spatiotemporal gait variables among children, adolescents and adults with DS compared to age-matched typically developing controls were: reduced gait velocity, reduced step length 2,12,23,25,34) , and an increase in step width 46) . In general, individuals with DS walk with greater hip flexion throughout the entire gait cycle, greater knee flexion during the stance phase and limited range of motion regarding plantar flexion of the ankle at initial contact 2,11,36) .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, considering gait stability, sTBI-2 showed higher nRMS compared to sTBI-1. High nRMS values have been associated with a higher amount of acceleration, and hence, decreased stability [13,29,30,33,34,50]. Both sTBI subgroups, and especially sTBI-2, displayed a decreased stability at the three upper body levels, particularly in the ML direction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this framework, attention is growing on miniaturized and wearable instruments that quantify movement patterns in a non invasive way: inertial measurement units (IMUs), embedding accelerometers and gyroscopes, have been widely used in the last two decades since they present many advantages compared to the traditional gait analysis approach based on stereophotogrammetry and force platforms. From the data measured by these units, spatiotemporal gait parameters [29] and stability-related parameters [13,30] can be extracted, allowing fall risk to be assessed [31], and allowing one to differentiate gait patterns between healthy and pathological populations [13,32,33,34]. However, in the sTBI population, an instrumented approach with IMUs has never been proposed and no information is available about their capability to discriminate among different levels of walking ability, as defined by currently administered clinical scales, such as the dynamic gait index scale [35].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thanks to HRs, additional features related to gait pattern can be seen even when conventional spatio-temporal parameters of gait are not able to reveal specific alterations. Moreover, trunk accelerations are easy to collect with a simple setup (i.e., a single wearable inertial sensor) either in clinical or other ecological settings for walking and thus the measure is not restricted to movement analysis laboratory environments [23,24], which in some cases can be considered a limitation because they require expensive equipment, lengthy set-up, and time-consuming post-processing procedures [25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%