Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine

Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine (대한재활의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of Validity and Reliability of Inertial Measurement Unit-Based Gait Analysis Systems

  • Cho, Young-Shin (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jang, Seong-Ho (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Cho, Jae-Sung (Department of Arts & Technology, School of Industrial Information Studies, Hanyang University) ;
  • Kim, Mi-Jung (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Hyeok Dong (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Sung Young (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Moon, Sang-Bok (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2018.06.14
  • Accepted : 2018.08.07
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective To replace camera-based three-dimensional motion analyzers which are widely used to analyze body movements and gait but are also costly and require a large dedicated space, this study evaluates the validity and reliability of inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based systems by analyzing their spatio-temporal and kinematic measurement parameters. Methods The investigation was conducted in three separate hospitals with three healthy participants. IMUs were attached to the abdomen as well as the thigh, shank, and foot of both legs of each participant. Each participant then completed a 10-m gait course 10 times. During each gait cycle, the hips, knees, and ankle joints were observed from the sagittal, frontal, and transverse planes. The experiments were conducted with both a camera-based system and an IMU-based system. The measured gait analysis data were evaluated for validity and reliability using root mean square error (RMSE) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analyses. Results The differences between the RMSE values of the two systems determined through kinematic parameters ranged from a minimum of 1.83 to a maximum of 3.98 with a tolerance close to 1%. The results of this study also confirmed the reliability of the IMU-based system, and all of the variables showed a statistically high ICC. Conclusion These results confirmed that IMU-based systems can reliably replace camera-based systems for clinical body motion and gait analyses.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Grant : Development of joint damage prediction algorithm through machine learning of gait analysis data, Development of AR sports training platform based recognition technology on smart glass

Supported by : Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion

References

  1. Simon SR. Quantification of human motion: gait analysis-benefits and limitations to its application to clinical problems. J Biomech 2004;37:1869-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.047
  2. Sutherland DH. The evolution of clinical gait analysis. Part II. kinematics. Gait Posture 2002;16:159-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(02)00004-8
  3. Sutherland DH. The evolution of clinical gait analysis. Part III. Kinetics and energy assessment. Gait Posture 2005;21:447-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.07.008
  4. Ugbolue UC, Papi E, Kaliarntas KT, Kerr A, Earl L, Pomeroy VM, et al. The evaluation of an inexpensive, 2D, video based gait assessment system for clinical use. Gait Posture 2013;38:483-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.01.018
  5. Costigan PA, Deluzio KJ, Wyss UP. Knee and hip kinetics during normal stair climbing. Gait Posture 2002;16:31-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00201-6
  6. Favre J, Jolles BM, Aissaoui R, Aminian K. Ambulatory measurement of 3D knee joint angle. J Biomech 2008;41:1029-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.12.003
  7. Watanabe T, Saito H, Koike E, Nitta K. A preliminary test of measurement of joint angles and stride length with wireless inertial sensors for wearable gait evaluation system. Comput Intell Neurosci 2011;2011:975193.
  8. Zheng H, Black ND, Harris ND. Position-sensing technologies for movement analysis in stroke rehabilitation. Med Biol Eng Comput 2005;43:413-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02344720
  9. Cloete T, Scheffer C. Benchmarking of a full-body inertial motion capture system for clinical gait analysis. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008;2008:4579-82.
  10. Benedetti MG, Merlo A, Leardini A. Inter-laboratory consistency of gait analysis measurements. Gait Posture 2013;38:934-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.04.022
  11. Boudarham J, Roche N, Pradon D, Bonnyaud C, Bensmail D, Zory R. Variations in kinematics during clinical gait analysis in stroke patients. PLoS One 2013;8:e66421. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066421
  12. Karasawa Y, Teruyama Y, Watanabe T. A trial of making reference gait data for simple gait evaluation system with wireless inertial sensors. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2013;2013:3427-30.
  13. van Acht V, Bongers E, Lambert N, Verberne R. Miniature wireless inertial sensor for measuring human motions. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2007;2007:6279-82.
  14. Luinge HJ, Veltink PH. Measuring orientation of human body segments using miniature gyroscopes and accelerometers. Med Biol Eng Comput 2005;43:273-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02345966
  15. Zhu R, Zhou Z. A real-time articulated human motion tracking using tri-axis inertial/magnetic sensors package. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2004;12:295-302. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2004.827825
  16. Kim MS, Yu SB, Lee KS. Development of a high-precision calibration method for inertial measurement unit. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 2014;15:567-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-014-0372-3
  17. Lee D, Lee S, Park S, Ko S. Test and error parameter estimation for MEMS-based low cost IMU calibration. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 2011;12:597-603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-011-0077-9
  18. Madgwick S. An efficient orientation filter for inertial and inertial/magnetic sensor arrays [Internet]. Bristol, UK: X-IO Technologies; 2010 [cited 2018 Nov 15]. Available from: http://x-io.co.uk/res/doc/madgwick_internal_report.pdf
  19. Alvarez JC, Gonzalez RC, Alvarez D, Lopez AM, Rodriguez-Uria J. Multisensor approach to walking distance estimation with foot inertial sensing. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2007;2007:5720-3.
  20. Dejnabadi H, Jolles BM, Aminian K. A new approach to accurate measurement of uniaxial joint angles based on a combination of accelerometers and gyroscopes. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2005;52:1478-84. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2005.851475
  21. Lau H, Tong K. The reliability of using accelerometer and gyroscope for gait event identification on persons with dropped foot. Gait Posture 2008;27:248-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2007.03.018
  22. Tong K, Granat MH. A practical gait analysis system using gyroscopes. Med Eng Phys 1999;21:87-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1350-4533(99)00030-2
  23. Brennan A, Zhang J, Deluzio K, Li Q. Quantification of inertial sensor-based 3D joint angle measurement accuracy using an instrumented gimbal. Gait Posture 2011;34:320-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.05.018
  24. Cho JS, Kang SI, Lee KH, Jang SH, Kim IY, Lee JS. Implementation of gait analysis system based on inertial sensors. J Rehabil Welf Eng Assist Technol 2015;9:137-44.
  25. Patterson MR, Delahunt E, Sweeney KT, Caulfield B. An ambulatory method of identifying anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed gait patterns. Sensors (Basel) 2014;14:887-99. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140100887
  26. Greene BR, McGrath D, O'Neill R, O'Donovan KJ, Burns A, Caulfield B. An adaptive gyroscope-based algorithm for temporal gait analysis. Med Biol Eng Comput 2010;48:1251-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-010-0692-0
  27. Salarian A, Russmann H, Vingerhoets FJ, Dehollain C, Blanc Y, Burkhard PR, et al. Gait assessment in Parkinson's disease: toward an ambulatory system for longterm monitoring. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2004;51:1434-43. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2004.827933
  28. Sabatini AM, Martelloni C, Scapellato S, Cavallo F. Assessment of walking features from foot inertial sensing. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2005;52:486-94.
  29. Feliz Alonso R, Zalama Casanova E, Gomez Garcia-Bermejo J. Pedestrian tracking using inertial sensors. J Phys Agents 2009;3:35-43.
  30. Lee KH, Kang SI, Cho JS, Lim DH, Lee JS, Kim IY. Development of gait distance measurement system based on inertial measurement units. J Rehabil Welf Eng Assist Technol 2015;9:161-8.
  31. Zhou H, Hu H. Inertial sensors for motion detection of human upper limbs. Sens Rev 2007;27:151-8. https://doi.org/10.1108/02602280710731713
  32. Kim CY, Hong JS, Chun KJ. Validation of feasibility of two depth sensor-based Microsoft Kinect cameras for human abduction-adduction motion analysis. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 2016;17:1209-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-016-0145-2
  33. Hamacher D, Hamacher D, Taylor WR, Singh NB, Schega L. Towards clinical application: repetitive sensor position re-calibration for improved reliability of gait parameters. Gait Posture 2014;39:1146-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.01.020
  34. Lutzner C, Voigt H, Roeder I, Kirschner S, Lutzner J. Placement makes a difference: accuracy of an accelerometer in measuring step number and stair climbing. Gait Posture 2014;39:1126-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.01.022
  35. Welch G, Foxlin E. Motion tracking: no silver bullet, but a respectable arsenal. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 2002;22:24-38.
  36. Bautmans I, Jansen B, Van Keymolen B, Mets T. Reliability and clinical correlates of 3D-accelerometry based gait analysis outcomes according to age and fall-risk. Gait Posture 2011;33:366-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.12.003
  37. Henriksen M, Lund H, Moe-Nilssen R, Bliddal H, Danneskiod-Samsoe B. Test-retest reliability of trunk accelerometric gait analysis. Gait Posture 2004;19:288-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6362(03)00069-9
  38. Prince B, Makrides L, Richman J. Research methodology and applied statistics. Part 2. The literature search. Physiother Can 1980;32:201-6.

Cited by

  1. Determining the Most Appropriate Assistive Walking Device Using the Inertial Measurement Unit-Based Gait Analysis System in Disabled Patients vol.44, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2020.44.1.48
  2. 대퇴의족의 자동 보행 모드 변경을 위한 랜덤 포레스트 기반 추정 모델 개발에 관한 연구 vol.24, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.7471/ikeee.2020.24.1.9
  3. Accuracy and repeatability of smartphone sensors for measuring shank-to-vertical angle vol.44, pp.3, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364620911314
  4. Changes in symmetry during gait in adults with Prader-Willi syndrome vol.23, pp.14, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2020.1787999
  5. Age-Related Changes in Smoothness of Gait of Healthy Children and Early Adolescents vol.52, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2019.1680949
  6. Kinematics and temporospatial parameters during gait from inertial motion capture in adults with and without HIV: a validity and reliability study vol.19, pp.None, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00802-2
  7. Immediate Effect of Restricted Knee Extension on Ground Reaction Force and Trunk Acceleration during Walking vol.2021, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8833221
  8. JTrack: A Digital Biomarker Platform for Remote Monitoring of Daily-Life Behaviour in Health and Disease vol.9, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.763621
  9. Assessing Stability of Crutch Users by Non-Contact Methods vol.18, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063001
  10. Identification of Patients with Sarcopenia Using Gait Parameters Based on Inertial Sensors vol.21, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/s21051786
  11. Measurement of Ankle Joint Movements Using IMUs during Running vol.21, pp.12, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/s21124240
  12. Investigating the validity of a single tri-axial accelerometer mounted on the head for monitoring the activities of daily living and the timed-up and go test vol.90, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.08.020
  13. Discriminative Mobility Characteristics between Neurotypical Young, Middle-Aged, and Older Adults Using Wireless Inertial Sensors vol.21, pp.19, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/s21196644
  14. Analysis of Gait Characteristics Using Hip-Knee Cyclograms in Patients with Hemiplegic Stroke vol.21, pp.22, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/s21227685
  15. Effects of vestibular neurectomy and neural compensation on head movements in patients undergoing vestibular schwannoma resection vol.11, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-79756-3
  16. Effects of knee osteoarthritis severity on inter-joint coordination and gait variability as measured by hip-knee cyclograms vol.11, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80237-w