-
Something wrong with this record ?
Agreement between the GAITRite® System and the Wearable Sensor BTS G-Walk® for measurement of gait parameters in healthy adults and Parkinson's disease patients
S. Vítečková, H. Horáková, K. Poláková, R. Krupička, E. Růžička, H. Brožová,
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
from 2013
Free Medical Journals
from 2013
PubMed Central
from 2013
Europe PubMed Central
from 2013
ProQuest Central
from 2013-02-12
Open Access Digital Library
from 2013-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
from 2013-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
from 2013
PubMed
32509441
DOI
10.7717/peerj.8835
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
Background: Nowadays, the most widely used types of wearable sensors in gait analysis are inertial sensors. The aim of the study was to assess the agreement between two different systems for measuring gait parameters (inertial sensor vs. electronic walkway) on healthy control subjects (HC) and patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: Forty healthy volunteers (26 men, 14 women, mean age 58.7 ± 7.7 years) participated in the study and 24 PD patients (19 men, five women, mean age 62.7 ± 9.8 years). Each participant walked across an electronic walkway, GAITRite, with embedded pressure sensors at their preferred walking speed. Concurrently a G-Walk sensor was attached with a semi-elastic belt to the L5 spinal segment of the subject. Walking speed, cadence, stride duration, stride length, stance, swing, single support and double support phase values were compared between both systems. Results: The Passing-Bablock regression slope line manifested the values closest to 1.00 for cadence and stride duration (0.99 ≤ 1.00) in both groups. The slope of other parameters varied between 0.26 (double support duration in PD) and 1.74 (duration of single support for HC). The mean square error confirmed the best fit of the regression line for speed, stride duration and stride length. The y-intercepts showed higher systematic error in PD than HC for speed, stance, swing, and single support phases. Conclusions: The final results of this study indicate that the G-Walk system can be used for evaluating the gait characteristics of the healthy subjects as well as the PD patients. However, the duration of the gait cycle phases should be used with caution due to the presence of a systematic error.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc20019158
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230815091209.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 201103s2020 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.7717/peerj.8835 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)32509441
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Vítečková, Slávka $u Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Kladno, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Agreement between the GAITRite® System and the Wearable Sensor BTS G-Walk® for measurement of gait parameters in healthy adults and Parkinson's disease patients / $c S. Vítečková, H. Horáková, K. Poláková, R. Krupička, E. Růžička, H. Brožová,
- 520 9_
- $a Background: Nowadays, the most widely used types of wearable sensors in gait analysis are inertial sensors. The aim of the study was to assess the agreement between two different systems for measuring gait parameters (inertial sensor vs. electronic walkway) on healthy control subjects (HC) and patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: Forty healthy volunteers (26 men, 14 women, mean age 58.7 ± 7.7 years) participated in the study and 24 PD patients (19 men, five women, mean age 62.7 ± 9.8 years). Each participant walked across an electronic walkway, GAITRite, with embedded pressure sensors at their preferred walking speed. Concurrently a G-Walk sensor was attached with a semi-elastic belt to the L5 spinal segment of the subject. Walking speed, cadence, stride duration, stride length, stance, swing, single support and double support phase values were compared between both systems. Results: The Passing-Bablock regression slope line manifested the values closest to 1.00 for cadence and stride duration (0.99 ≤ 1.00) in both groups. The slope of other parameters varied between 0.26 (double support duration in PD) and 1.74 (duration of single support for HC). The mean square error confirmed the best fit of the regression line for speed, stride duration and stride length. The y-intercepts showed higher systematic error in PD than HC for speed, stance, swing, and single support phases. Conclusions: The final results of this study indicate that the G-Walk system can be used for evaluating the gait characteristics of the healthy subjects as well as the PD patients. However, the duration of the gait cycle phases should be used with caution due to the presence of a systematic error.
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Horáková, Hana, $u Department of Neurology and Center of Clinical Neuroscience, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital in Prague, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. $d 1990- $7 xx0210941
- 700 1_
- $a Poláková, Kamila $u Department of Neurology and Center of Clinical Neuroscience, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital in Prague, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Krupička, Radim $u Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Kladno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Růžička, Evžen $u Department of Neurology and Center of Clinical Neuroscience, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital in Prague, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Brožová, Hana $u Department of Neurology and Center of Clinical Neuroscience, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital in Prague, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00184567 $t PeerJ $x 2167-8359 $g Roč. 8, č. - (2020), s. e8835
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32509441 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20201103 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230815091206 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ind $b bmc $g 1585938 $s 1109356
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2020 $b 8 $c - $d e8835 $e 20200522 $i 2167-8359 $m PeerJ $n PeerJ $x MED00184567
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20201103