2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0031-9406(05)60117-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Review of Observational Gait Assessment in Clinical Practice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

2
23
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
2
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The current alternative to MOCAP is observational gait analysis (OGA), which is intrinsically subjective and sensitive to the observer's experience [5]. Recently, however, large efforts have been employed in developing low-cost, inertial sensor systems that can complement OGA with objective and reliable information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The current alternative to MOCAP is observational gait analysis (OGA), which is intrinsically subjective and sensitive to the observer's experience [5]. Recently, however, large efforts have been employed in developing low-cost, inertial sensor systems that can complement OGA with objective and reliable information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to improve the gait of these children and to analyze the effects of the proposed interventions it becomes necessary to perform an instrumented analysis of the gait before and after the intervention 1,5,6 . The kinetic, kinematic and electromyographic quantitative analysis is considered by the literature the gold standard of the gait assessment, since it generates an accurate and reliable information on the three planes of motion 1,[7][8][9][10] . Despite of the presented benefits, the authors 1,7-10 consider their applicability in clinical practice limited, since this type of analysis requires expensive and sophisticated equipment reducing its availability in most of the rehabilitation centers, especially in emerging countries.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although some OGA methods have been shown valid and reliable, it is generally understood that they are specific to patient groups, subjective, and sensitive to the observer's experience (Toro et al, 2003). In 1999, Coutts (Coutts, 1999) argued that despite its limitations, OGA would never be totally replaced as the default GA method in the clinical environment because of ease of use.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%