Can We Accurately Measure Axial Segment Coordination during Turning Using Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs)?
ABSTRACT: Camera-based 3D motion analysis systems are considered to be the gold standard for movement analysis. However, using such equipment in a clinical setting is prohibitive due to the expense and time-consuming nature of data collection and analysis. Therefore, Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) have been suggested as an alternative to measure movement in clinical settings. One area which is both important and challenging is the assessment of turning kinematics in individuals with movement disorders. This study aimed to validate the use of IMUs in the measurement of turning kinematics in healthy adults compared to a camera-based 3D motion analysis system. Data were collected from twelve participants using a Vicon motion analysis system which were compared with data from four IMUs placed on the forehead, middle thorax, and feet in order to determine accuracy and reliability. The results demonstrated that the IMU sensors produced reliable kinematic measures and showed excellent reliability (ICCs 0.80-0.98) and no significant differences were seen in paired t-tests in all parameters when comparing the two systems. This suggests that the IMU sensors provide a viable alternative to camera-based motion capture that could be used in isolation to gather data from individuals with movement disorders in clinical settings and real-life situations.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based motion capture systems are gaining popularity for gait analysis outside laboratories. It is important to determine the performance of such systems in specific patient populations. We aimed to validate and determine within-day reliability of an IMU system for measuring lower limb gait kinematics and temporal-spatial parameters (TSP) in people with and without HIV.<h4>Methods</h4>Gait was recorded in eight adults with HIV (PLHIV) and eight HIV-seronegative participants (SNP), using IMUs and optical motion capture (OMC) simultaneously. Participants performed six gait trials. Fifteen TSP and 28 kinematic angles were extracted. Intraclass correlations (ICC), root-mean-square error (RMSE), mean absolute percentage error and Bland-Altman analyses were used to assess concurrent validity of the IMU system (relative to OMC) separately in PLHIV and SNP. IMU reliability was assessed during within-session retest of trials. ICCs were used to assess relative reliability. Standard error of measurement (SEM) and percentage SEM were used to assess absolute reliability.<h4>Results</h4>Between-system TSP differences demonstrated acceptable-to-excellent ICCs (0.71-0.99), except for double support time and temporophasic parameters (<?0.60). All TSP demonstrated good mean absolute percentage errors (?7.40%). For kinematics, ICCs were acceptable to excellent (0.75-1.00) for all but three range of motion (ROM) and four discrete angles. RMSE and bias were 0.0°-4.7° for all but two ROM and 10 discrete angles. In both groups, TSP reliability was acceptable to excellent for relative (ICC 0.75-0.99) (except for one temporal and two temporophasic parameters) and absolute (%SEM 1.58-15.23) values. Reliability trends of IMU-measured kinematics were similar between groups and demonstrated acceptable-to-excellent relative reliability (ICC 0.76-0.99) and clinically acceptable absolute reliability (SEM 0.7°-4.4°) for all but two and three discrete angles, respectively. Both systems demonstrated similar magnitude and directional trends for differences when comparing the gait of PLHIV with that of SNP.<h4>Conclusions</h4>IMU-based gait analysis is valid and reliable when applied in PLHIV; demonstrating a sufficiently low precision error to be used for clinical interpretation (<?5° for most kinematics; <?20% for TSP). IMU-based gait analysis is sensitive to subtle gait deviations that may occur in PLHIV.
Project description:Investigating the effects of load carriage on military soldiers using optical motion capture is challenging. However, inertial measurement units (IMUs) provide a promising alternative. Our purpose was to compare optical motion capture with an Xsens IMU system in terms of movement reconstruction using principal component analysis (PCA) using correlation coefficients and joint kinematics using root mean squared error (RMSE). Eighteen civilians performed military-type movements while their motion was recorded using both optical and IMU-based systems. Tasks included walking, running, and transitioning between running, kneeling, and prone positions. PCA was applied to both the optical and virtual IMU markers, and the correlations between the principal component (PC) scores were assessed. Full-body joint angles were calculated and compared using RMSE between optical markers, IMU data, and virtual markers generated from IMU data with and without coordinate system alignment. There was good agreement in movement reconstruction using PCA; the average correlation coefficient was 0.81 ± 0.14. RMSE values between the optical markers and IMU data for flexion-extension were less than 9°, and 15° for the lower and upper limbs, respectively, across all tasks. The underlying biomechanical model and associated coordinate systems appear to influence RMSE values the most. The IMU system appears appropriate for capturing and reconstructing full-body motion variability for military-based movements.
Project description:Gait analysis based on full-body motion capture technology (MoCap) can be used in rehabilitation to aid in decision making during treatments or therapies. In order to promote the use of MoCap gait analysis based on inertial measurement units (IMUs) or optical technology, it is necessary to overcome certain limitations, such as the need for magnetically controlled environments, which affect IMU systems, or the need for additional instrumentation to detect gait events, which affects IMUs and optical systems. We present a MoCap gait analysis system called Move Human Sensors (MH), which incorporates proposals to overcome both limitations and can be configured via magnetometer-free IMUs (MH-IMU) or clusters of optical markers (MH-OPT). Using a test-retest reliability experiment with thirty-three healthy subjects (20 men and 13 women, 21.7 ± 2.9 years), we determined the reproducibility of both configurations. The assessment confirmed that the proposals performed adequately and allowed us to establish usage considerations. This study aims to enhance gait analysis in daily clinical practice.
Project description:Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are increasingly used to estimate movement quality and quantity to the infer the nature of motor behavior. The current literature contains several attempts to estimate movement smoothness using data from IMUs, many of which assume that the translational and rotational kinematics measured by IMUs can be directly used with the smoothness measures spectral arc length (SPARC) and log dimensionless jerk (LDLJ-V). However, there has been no investigation of the validity of these approaches. In this paper, we systematically evaluate the use of these measures on the kinematics measured by IMUs. We show that: (a) SPARC and LDLJ-V are valid measures of smoothness only when used with velocity; (b) SPARC and LDLJ-V applied on translational velocity reconstructed from IMU is highly error prone due to drift caused by integration of reconstruction errors; (c) SPARC can be applied directly on rotational velocities measured by a gyroscope, but LDLJ-V can be error prone. For discrete translational movements, we propose a modified version of the LDLJ-V measure, which can be applied to acceleration data (LDLJ-A). We evaluate the performance of these measures using simulated and experimental data. We demonstrate that the accuracy of LDLJ-A depends on the time profile of IMU orientation reconstruction error. Finally, we provide recommendations for how to appropriately apply these measures in practice under different scenarios, and highlight various factors to be aware of when performing smoothness analysis using IMU data.
Project description:Gait variability observed in step duration is predictive of impending adverse health outcomes among apparently healthy older adults and could potentially be evaluated using wearable sensors (inertial measurement units, IMU). The purpose of the present study was to establish the reliability and concurrent validity of gait variability and complexity evaluated with a waist and an ankle-worn IMU. Seventeen women (age 74.8 (SD 44) years) and 10 men (73.7 (4.1) years) attended two laboratory measurement sessions a week apart. Their stride duration variability was concurrently evaluated based on a continuous 3 min walk using a force plate and a waist- and an ankle-worn IMU. Their gait complexity (multiscale sample entropy) was evaluated from the waist-worn IMU. The force plate indicated excellent stride duration variability reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC = 0.90), whereas fair to good reliability (ICC = 0.47 to 0.66) was observed from the IMUs. The IMUs exhibited poor to excellent concurrent validity in stride duration variability compared to the force plate (ICC = 0.22 to 0.93). A good to excellent reliability was observed for gait complexity in most coarseness scales (ICC = 0.60 to 0.82). A reasonable congruence with the force plate-measured stride duration variability was observed on many coarseness scales (correlation coefficient = 0.38 to 0.83). In conclusion, waist-worn IMU entropy estimates may provide a feasible indicator of gait variability among community-dwelling ambulatory older adults.
Project description:The use of inertial measurement units (IMUs) has gained popularity for the estimation of lower limb kinematics. However, implementations in clinical practice are still lacking. The aim of this review is twofold-to evaluate the methodological requirements for IMU-based joint kinematic estimation to be applicable in a clinical setting, and to suggest future research directions. Studies within the PubMed, Web Of Science and EMBASE databases were screened for eligibility, based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) studies must include a methodological description of how kinematic variables were obtained for the lower limb, (2) kinematic data must have been acquired by means of IMUs, (3) studies must have validated the implemented method against a golden standard reference system. Information on study characteristics, signal processing characteristics and study results was assessed and discussed. This review shows that methods for lower limb joint kinematics are inherently application dependent. Sensor restrictions are generally compensated with biomechanically inspired assumptions and prior information. Awareness of the possible adaptations in the IMU-based kinematic estimates by incorporating such prior information and assumptions is necessary, before drawing clinical decisions. Future research should focus on alternative validation methods, subject-specific IMU-based biomechanical joint models and disturbed movement patterns in real-world settings.
Project description:Participation in sports has risen in the United States over the last few years, increasing the risk of injuries such as tears to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in the knee. Previous studies have shown a correlation between knee kinematics when landing from a jump and this injury. The purpose of this study was to validate the ability of a commercially available inertial measurement units (IMUs) to accurately measure knee joint angles during a dynamic movement. Eight healthy subjects participated in the study. Validation was performed by comparing the angles measured by the wearable device to those obtained through the gold standard motion capture system when landing from a jump. Root mean square, linear regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots were performed/constructed. The mean difference between the wearable device and the motion capture data was 8.4° (flexion/extension), 4.9° (ab/adduction), and 3.9° (rotation). In addition, the device was more accurate at smaller knee angles. In our study, a commercially available wearable IMU was able to perform fairly well under certain conditions and was less accurate in other conditions.
Project description:Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are commonly used for localization or movement tracking in pervasive healthcare-related studies, and gait analysis is one of the most often studied topics using IMUs. The increasing variety of commercially available IMU devices offers convenience by combining the sensor modalities and simplifies the data collection procedures. However, selecting the most suitable IMU device for a certain use case is increasingly challenging. In this study, guidelines for IMU selection are proposed. In particular, seven IMUs were compared in terms of their specifications, data collection procedures, and raw data quality. Data collected from the IMUs were then analyzed by a gait analysis algorithm. The difference in accuracy of the calculated gait parameters between the IMUs could be used to retrace the issues in raw data, such as acceleration range or sensor calibration. Based on our algorithm, we were able to identify the best-suited IMUs for our needs. This study provides an overview of how to select the IMUs based on the area of study with concrete examples, and gives insights into the features of seven commercial IMUs using real data.
Project description:Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are small wearable sensors that have tremendous potential to be applied to clinical gait analysis. They allow objective evaluation of gait and movement disorders outside the clinic and research laboratory, and permit evaluation on large numbers of steps. However, repeatability and validity data of these systems are sparse for gait metrics. The purpose of this study was to determine the validity and between-day repeatability of spatiotemporal metrics (gait speed, stance percent, swing percent, gait cycle time, stride length, cadence, and step duration) as measured with the APDM Opal IMUs and Mobility Lab system. We collected data on 39 healthy subjects. Subjects were tested over two days while walking on a standard treadmill, split-belt treadmill, or overground, with IMUs placed in two locations: both feet and both ankles. The spatiotemporal measurements taken with the IMU system were validated against data from an instrumented treadmill, or using standard clinical procedures. Repeatability and minimally detectable change (MDC) of the system was calculated between days. IMUs displayed high to moderate validity when measuring most of the gait metrics tested. Additionally, these measurements appear to be repeatable when used on the treadmill and overground. The foot configuration of the IMUs appeared to better measure gait parameters; however, both the foot and ankle configurations demonstrated good repeatability. In conclusion, the IMU system in this study appears to be both accurate and repeatable for measuring spatiotemporal gait parameters in healthy young adults.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to determine the validity and reliability of Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) for the assessment of craniocervical range of motion (ROM) in patients with cerebral palsy (CP). METHODS:twenty-three subjects with CP and 23 controls, aged between 4 and 14 years, were evaluated on two occasions, separated by 3 to 5 days. An IMU and a Cervical Range of Motion device (CROM) were used to assess craniocervical ROM in the three spatial planes. Validity was assessed by comparing IMU and CROM data using the Pearson correlation coefficient, the paired t-test and Bland-Altman plots. Intra-day and inter-day relative reliability were determined using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). The Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) and the Minimum Detectable Change at a 90% confidence level (MDC90) were obtained for absolute reliability. RESULTS:High correlations were detected between methods in both groups on the sagittal and frontal planes (r > 0.9), although this was reduced in the case of the transverse plane. Bland-Altman plots indicated bias below 5º, although for the range of cervical rotation in the CP group, this was 8.2º. The distance between the limits of agreement was over 23.5º in both groups, except for the range of flexion-extension in the control group. ICCs were higher than 0.8 for both comparisons and groups, except for inter-day comparisons of rotational range in the CP group. Absolute reliability showed high variability, with most SEM below 8.5º, although with worse inter-day results, mainly in CP subjects, with the MDC90 of rotational range achieving more than 20º. CONCLUSIONS:IMU application is highly correlated with CROM for the assessment of craniocervical movement in CP and healthy subjects; however, both methods are not interchangeable. The IMU error of measurement can be considered clinically acceptable; however, caution should be taken when this is used as a reference measure for interventions.