Gait evaluation using inertial measurement units in subjects with Parkinson's disease. (October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zago, Matteo; Sforza, Chiarella; Pacifici, Ilaria; Cimolin, Veronica; Camerota, Filippo; Celletti, Claudia; Condoluci, Claudia; De Pandis, Maria Francesca; Galli, Manuela
• Is Part Of: Journal of electromyography and kinesiology. Volume 42(2018)
• Page Start: 44
• Page End: 48
• Publication Date: 2018-10
• Subjects: IMU -- Wearables -- Optoelectronic motion capture -- Gait parameters -- Gait analysis; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Kinesiology -- Periodicals; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Movement -- physiology -- Periodicals; Muscles -- physiology -- Periodicals; Électromyographie -- Périodiques; Cinésiologie -- Périodiques; Electromyography; Kinesiology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.740757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2018.06.009
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1050-6411

Abstract

Abstract: We investigated whether a wearable system based on a commercial Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) can reliably provide the main spatiotemporal gait parameters in subjects with Parkinson's disease (PD), compared to a gold-standard optoelectronic motion capture system. The gait of 22 subjects with PD (Age: 69.4 (6.1) years; UPDRS-III: 28.0 (9.2)) was recorded simultaneously with an optoelectronic system and a commercial IMU-based wearable system. Eight spatiotemporal parameters describing the step cycle (cadence, velocity, stride length, stride duration, step length, stance, swing and double support duration) were compared between the two systems. The IMU and the optical system reported comparable gait parameters, with the exception of walking velocity (optical system, 0.72 (0.27) m∙s −1 vs. IMU: 0.86 (0.26) m∙s −1, p < 0.05). Although most parameters detected by the two systems were not statistically different, some of them like stride length, double support and step duration showed notable root mean square and mean absolute errors. In conclusion, the algorithm embedded in the current release of the commercial IMU requires further improvements to be properly used with subjects with PD. Overall, the IMU system was sufficiently accurate in the assessment of fundamental gait spatiotemporal parameters. The fast and simplified data recording process allowed by wearables makes this technology appealing and represents a possible solution for the quantification of gait in the clinical context, especially when using a traditional 3D optoelectronic gait analysis is not possible, and when subjects are not fully cooperative.