Estimation of pelvis kinematics in level walking based on a single inertial sensor positioned close to the sacrum: validation on healthy subjects with stereophotogrammetric system

BioMedical Engineering OnLine

Francesca Buganè²  Maria Grazia Benedetti³  Valentina D’Angeli¹  Alberto Leardini¹ 

[1] Movement Analysis Laboratory, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, via di Barbiano 1/10, Bologna 40100, Italy

[2] LetSense Srl, via Bruno Buozzi 25, Castel Maggiore 40013, Italy

[3] Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Unit, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, via G. C. Pupilli 1, Bologna 40100, Italy

关键词: Inertial motion units;    Gait analysis;    Validation;    Gyroscope;    Walking;    Pelvis kinematics;   

Others  :  1084256
DOI  :  10.1186/1475-925X-13-146

 received in 2014-06-16, accepted in 2014-10-12,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Kinematics measures from inertial sensors have a value in the clinical assessment of pathological gait, to track quantitatively the outcome of interventions and rehabilitation programs. To become a standard tool for clinicians, it is necessary to evaluate their capability to provide reliable and comprehensible information, possibly by comparing this with that provided by the traditional gait analysis. The aim of this study was to assess by state-of-the-art gait analysis the reliability of a single inertial device attached to the sacrum to measure pelvis kinematics during level walking.

Methods

The output signals of the three-axis gyroscope were processed to estimate the spatial orientation of the pelvis in the sagittal (tilt angle), frontal (obliquity) and transverse (rotation) anatomical planes These estimated angles were compared with those provided by a 8 TV-cameras stereophotogrammetric system utilizing a standard experimental protocol, with four markers on the pelvis. This was observed in a group of sixteen healthy subjects while performing three repetitions of level walking along a 10 meter walkway at slow, normal and fast speeds. The determination coefficient, the scale factor and the bias of a linear regression model were calculated to represent the differences between the angular patterns from the two measurement systems. For the intra-subject variability, one volunteer was asked to repeat walking at normal speed 10 times.

Results

A good match was observed for obliquity and rotation angles. For the tilt angle, the pattern and range of motion was similar, but a bias was observed, due to the different initial inclination angle in the sagittal plane of the inertial sensor with respect to the pelvis anatomical frame. A good intra-subject consistency has also been shown by the small variability of the pelvic angles as estimated by the new system, confirmed by very small values of standard deviation for all three angles.

Conclusions

These results suggest that this inertial device is a reliable alternative to stereophotogrammetric systems for pelvis kinematics measurements, in addition to being easier to use and cheaper. The device can provide to the patient and to the examiner reliable feedback in real-time during routine clinical tests.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Buganè et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Malanga G, De Lisa JA: Clinical observation. In Gait Analysis in the Science of Rehabilitation. Section I. Edited by De Lisa JA. Baltimore, MD, USA: Department of Veterans Affairs; 1998:1-10.
• [2]Iosa M, Fusco A, Moroni G, Paolucci S: Development and decline of upright gait stability. Front Aging Neurosci 2014, 6:14.
• [3]Saunders JB, Inman VT, Eberhart HD: The major determinants in normal and pathological gait. J Bone Joint Surg 1953, 35:543-558.
• [4]Huntley JS: Trendelenburg and not Trendelenberg. Lancet 2003, 362(9378):174.
• [5]Murray MP, Kory RC, Clarkson BH: Walking patterns in healthy old men. J Gerontol 1969, 24:169-178.
• [6]Gaston MS, Rutz E, Dreher T, Brunner R: Transverse plane rotation of the foot and transverse hip and pelvic kinematics in diplegic cerebral palsy. Gait Posture 2011, 35(2):218-221.
• [7]Goujon-Pillet H, Sapin E, Fodé P, Lavaste F: Three-dimensional motions of trunk and pelvis during transfemoral amputee gait. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008, 89(1):87-94.
• [8]Tranberg R, Zugner R, Karrholm J: Improvements in hip- and pelvic motion for patients with osseointegrated trans-femoral prostheses. Gait Posture 2011, 33:165-168.
• [9]Rusaw D, Ramstrand N: Motion-analysis studies of transtibial prosthesis users: a systematic review. Prosthet Orthot Int 2011, 35(1):8-19.
• [10]Tao W, Liu T, Zheng R, Feng H: Gait analysis using wearable sensors. Sensors 2012, 12:2255-2283.
• [11]Kadaba MP, Ramakrishnan HK, Wootten ME: Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking. J Orthop Res 1990, 8:383-392.
• [12]Leardini A, Sawacha Z, Paolini G, Ingrosso S, Nativo R, Benedetti MG: A new anatomically based protocol for gait analysis in children. Gait Posture 2007, 26:560-571.
• [13]Benedetti MG, Catani F, Leardini A, Pignotti E, Giannini S: Data management in gait analysis for clinical applications. Clin Biomech 1998, 13(3):204-215.
• [14]Borhani M, McGregor AH, Bull AM: An alternative technical marker set for the pelvis is more repeatable than the standard pelvic marker set. Gait Posture 2013, 38(4):1032-1037.
• [15]Smith M, Curtis D, Bencke J, Stebbins J: Use of wand markers on the pelvis in three dimensional gait analysis. Gait Posture 2013, 38(4):1070-1073.
• [16]Cappozzo A, Catani F, Leardini A, Benedetti MG, Della Croce U: Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: experimental artifacts. Clin Biomech 1996, 11(2):90-100.
• [17]Hara R, Sangeux M, Baker R, McGinley J: Quantification of pelvic soft tissue artifact in multiple static positions. Gait Posture 2014, 39(2):712-717.
• [18]McGinley JL, Baker R, Wolfe R, Morris ME: The reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: a systematic review. Gait Posture 2009, 29(3):360-369.
• [19]Muro-de-la-Herran A, Garcia-Zapirain B, Mendez-Zorrilla A: Gait analysis methods: an overview of wearable and Non-wearable systems, highlighting clinical applications. Sensors 2014, 14:3362-3394.
• [20]Bugané F, Benedetti MG, Casadio G, Attala S, Biagi F, Manca M, Leardini A: Estimation of spatial-temporal gait parameters in level walking base on a single accelerometer: validation on normal subjects by standard gait analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2012, 108(1):29-37.
• [21]Mazzà C, Donati M, McCamley J, Picerno P, Cappozzo A: An optimized Kalman filter for the estimation of trunk orientation from inertial sensors data during treadmill walking. Gait Posture 2012, 35:138-142.
• [22]Bonnet V, Mazzà C, McCamley J, Cappozzo A: Use of weighted Fourier linear combiner filters to estimate lower trunk 3D orientation from gyroscope sensors data. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2013, 10:29. BioMed Central Full Text
• [23]Luinge HJ, Veltink PH: Measuring orientation of human body segments using miniature gyroscopes and accelerometers. Med Biol Eng Comput 2005, 43:273-282.
• [24]Grimpampi E, Bonnet V, Taviani A, Mazzà C: Estimate of lower trunk angles in pathological gaits using gyroscope data. Gait Posture 2013, 38:523-527.
• [25]Leardini A, Lullini G, Giannini S, Berti L, Ortolani M, Caravaggi P: Validation of the angular measurements of a new inertial-measurement-unit based rehabilitation system: comparison with state-of-the-art gait analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2014, 11:136. doi:10.1186/1743-0003-11-136 BioMed Central Full Text
• [26]Menz HB, Lord SR, Fitzpatrick RC: Acceleration patterns of the head and pelvis when walking are associated with risk of falling in community-dwelling older people. J Gerontol 2003, 24:446-452.
• [27]Ishigaki N, Kimura T, Usui Y, Aoki K, Narita N, Shimizu M, Hara K, Ogihara N, Nakamura K, Kato H, Ohira M, Yokokawa Y, Miyoshi K, Murakami N, Okada S, Nakamura T, Saito N: Analysis of pelvic movement in the elderly during walking using a posture monitoring system equipped with a triaxial accelerometer and gyroscope. J Biomech 2011, 44:1788-1792.
• [28]Bolink SAAN, van Laarhoven SN, Lipperts M, Heyligers IC, Grimm B: Inertial sensor motion analysis of gait, sit-stand transfers and step-up transfers: differentiating knee patients from healthy controls. Physiol Meas 2012, 33:1947-1958.
• [29]Bonnechère B, Jansen B, Salvia P, Bouzahouene H, Omelina L, Moiseev F, Sholukha V, Cornelis J, Rooze M, Van Sint JS: Validity and reliability of the Kinect within functional assessment activities: comparison with standard stereophotogrammetry. Gait Posture 2014, 39(1):593-598.
• [30]Zijlstra W, Hof At L: Assessment of spatial-temporal gait parameters from trunk accelerations during human walking. Gait Posture 2003, 18:1-10.
• [31]Iosa M, Cereatti A, Cappozzo A: A linear method for curve comparison in gait data. Gait Posture 2009, 30:s53-s54.
• [32]Benedetti MG, Merlo A, Leardini A: Inter-laboratory consistency of gait analysis measurements. Gait Posture 2013, 38(4):934-939.