Measures of Gait Complexity during the Timed Up-and-Go Test in Older Adults with Vertebral Compression Fracture

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Chen-I Kao, Ben-Yi Liau, Fang-Chuan Kuo
{"title":"Measures of Gait Complexity during the Timed Up-and-Go Test in Older Adults with Vertebral Compression Fracture","authors":"Chen-I Kao, Ben-Yi Liau, Fang-Chuan Kuo","doi":"10.1007/s40846-024-00885-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>Objective motor and gait assessment is crucial for assessing fall risk and predicting intervention efficacy. This study compares the postural control and gait complexity in adults with and without vertebral compression fracture (VCF) during the timed up-and-go (TUG) test.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>The groups of eligible older adults were divided into VCF (<i>n</i> = 21) and Control (without VCF; <i>n</i> = 43). The Biodex Balance System was used for postural stability and motor control tests. A TUG test was conducted, during which an inertial motion system was used to record joint kinematics and center of mass (CoM) trajectories. The gait complexity was assessed using multiscale entropy (MSE) analysis of pelvic acceleration.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>The VCF group had poor postural stability and longer times in the motor control test than the control group. During the sit-to-stand phase of the TUG test, the VCF group exhibited more significant mediolateral CoM displacement and less anteroposterior displacement than the control group. The VCF group had more significant vertical CoM displacement, lower acceleration, and lower ranges of motion in the cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and hip joints and longer stance phases than the control group while performing the TUG test. Furthermore, the VCF group had a higher complexity index of gait, indicating lower adaptability than the control group during walking.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Patients with VCF exhibited lower postural stability, potentially increasing their risk of falls. The patients adopted various less stable body configurations during the TUG test. Gait quality characteristics measured through MSE analysis may help evaluate the walking adaptability of individuals at risk of falls.</p>","PeriodicalId":50133,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40846-024-00885-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Objective motor and gait assessment is crucial for assessing fall risk and predicting intervention efficacy. This study compares the postural control and gait complexity in adults with and without vertebral compression fracture (VCF) during the timed up-and-go (TUG) test.

Methods

The groups of eligible older adults were divided into VCF (n = 21) and Control (without VCF; n = 43). The Biodex Balance System was used for postural stability and motor control tests. A TUG test was conducted, during which an inertial motion system was used to record joint kinematics and center of mass (CoM) trajectories. The gait complexity was assessed using multiscale entropy (MSE) analysis of pelvic acceleration.

Results

The VCF group had poor postural stability and longer times in the motor control test than the control group. During the sit-to-stand phase of the TUG test, the VCF group exhibited more significant mediolateral CoM displacement and less anteroposterior displacement than the control group. The VCF group had more significant vertical CoM displacement, lower acceleration, and lower ranges of motion in the cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and hip joints and longer stance phases than the control group while performing the TUG test. Furthermore, the VCF group had a higher complexity index of gait, indicating lower adaptability than the control group during walking.

Conclusion

Patients with VCF exhibited lower postural stability, potentially increasing their risk of falls. The patients adopted various less stable body configurations during the TUG test. Gait quality characteristics measured through MSE analysis may help evaluate the walking adaptability of individuals at risk of falls.

Abstract Image

椎体压缩性骨折老年人在定时上走测试中的步态复杂性测量方法
目的 客观的运动和步态评估对于评估跌倒风险和预测干预效果至关重要。本研究比较了有椎体压缩性骨折(VCF)和无椎体压缩性骨折(VCF)的成年人在定时起立行走(TUG)测试中的姿势控制和步态复杂性。使用 Biodex 平衡系统进行姿势稳定性和运动控制测试。在进行 TUG 测试时,使用惯性运动系统记录关节运动学和质心(CoM)轨迹。通过对骨盆加速度进行多尺度熵(MSE)分析,对步态复杂性进行了评估。结果与对照组相比,VCF 组的姿势稳定性较差,运动控制测试时间较长。在TUG测试的从坐到站阶段,与对照组相比,VCF组表现出更明显的CoM内外侧位移和更小的前胸位移。在进行 TUG 测试时,与对照组相比,VCF 组的垂直 CoM 位移更明显,加速度更低,颈椎、胸椎、腰椎和髋关节的活动范围更小,站立阶段更长。此外,VCF 组的步态复杂指数较高,表明其在行走过程中的适应能力低于对照组。在 TUG 测试中,患者采用了各种稳定性较差的身体构型。通过 MSE 分析测得的步态质量特征有助于评估有跌倒风险的人的行走适应性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The purpose of Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, JMBE, is committed to encouraging and providing the standard of biomedical engineering. The journal is devoted to publishing papers related to clinical engineering, biomedical signals, medical imaging, bio-informatics, tissue engineering, and so on. Other than the above articles, any contributions regarding hot issues and technological developments that help reach the purpose are also included.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信