基于标记系统的惯性测量单元与脑卒中后步态时空和关节偏移度量的有效性。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Heather L Knight, Ethan B Schonhaut, Camden J Jacobs, Jesse C Dean
{"title":"基于标记系统的惯性测量单元与脑卒中后步态时空和关节偏移度量的有效性。","authors":"Heather L Knight, Ethan B Schonhaut, Camden J Jacobs, Jesse C Dean","doi":"10.1123/jab.2025-0098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People with chronic stroke often walk with altered spatiotemporal parameters and joint excursions, metrics that can serve as intervention targets. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) allow such metrics to be quantified outside of a traditional motion capture laboratory. The purpose of this study was to quantify the validity of common poststroke biomechanical gait metrics between an IMU-based and a marker-based system during treadmill walking, a context that facilitates gait training interventions. For 61 people with chronic stroke, we assessed the validity of stride duration, stride length, and sagittal plane joint excursions of the bilateral hip, knee, and ankle in 2 ways: (1) Across participants, revealing whether both systems similarly characterize participants' average gait parameters; and (2) Within participants, revealing whether both systems similarly quantify stride-by-stride variance. Across participants, all joint metrics had either excellent (Lin correlation coefficient; LCC > .75) or good (LCC .60-.74) validity, suggesting that IMU-derived metrics that are often the target of treatment can be appropriately compared to existing population norms. In contrast, median validity within participants was excellent for stride duration, but only poor (LCC < .40) to fair (LCC .40-.59) for stride length and most joint excursions. Therefore, IMU-derived gait metrics quantified on a stride-by-stride basis should be interpreted cautiously.</p>","PeriodicalId":54883,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Biomechanics","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of Poststroke Gait Spatiotemporal and Joint Excursion Metrics Between Inertial Measurement Units and a Marker-Based System.\",\"authors\":\"Heather L Knight, Ethan B Schonhaut, Camden J Jacobs, Jesse C Dean\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/jab.2025-0098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>People with chronic stroke often walk with altered spatiotemporal parameters and joint excursions, metrics that can serve as intervention targets. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) allow such metrics to be quantified outside of a traditional motion capture laboratory. The purpose of this study was to quantify the validity of common poststroke biomechanical gait metrics between an IMU-based and a marker-based system during treadmill walking, a context that facilitates gait training interventions. For 61 people with chronic stroke, we assessed the validity of stride duration, stride length, and sagittal plane joint excursions of the bilateral hip, knee, and ankle in 2 ways: (1) Across participants, revealing whether both systems similarly characterize participants' average gait parameters; and (2) Within participants, revealing whether both systems similarly quantify stride-by-stride variance. Across participants, all joint metrics had either excellent (Lin correlation coefficient; LCC > .75) or good (LCC .60-.74) validity, suggesting that IMU-derived metrics that are often the target of treatment can be appropriately compared to existing population norms. In contrast, median validity within participants was excellent for stride duration, but only poor (LCC < .40) to fair (LCC .40-.59) for stride length and most joint excursions. Therefore, IMU-derived gait metrics quantified on a stride-by-stride basis should be interpreted cautiously.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Biomechanics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.2025-0098\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.2025-0098","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

摘要

慢性中风患者通常行走时时空参数和关节活动发生改变,这些指标可作为干预目标。惯性测量单元(imu)允许在传统的运动捕捉实验室之外对这些度量进行量化。本研究的目的是量化基于imu和基于标记的系统在跑步机上行走时常见的中风后生物力学步态指标的有效性,这有利于步态训练干预。对于61名慢性中风患者,我们以两种方式评估了步幅、步幅长度和双侧髋关节、膝关节和踝关节矢状面位移的有效性:(1)在参与者中,揭示这两个系统是否相似地表征了参与者的平均步态参数;(2)在参与者内部,揭示两个系统是否相似地量化了跨步方差。在所有参与者中,所有联合指标的效度要么很好(Lin相关系数;LCC为0.75),要么很好(LCC为0.60 - 0.74),这表明imu衍生的指标通常是治疗的目标,可以适当地与现有的人群规范进行比较。相比之下,参与者的中位效度在步幅持续时间方面是优秀的,但在步幅长度和大多数关节远足方面只有差(LCC < 0.40)到公平(LCC 0.40 - 0.59)。因此,imu衍生的以每步为基础量化的步态指标应该谨慎解读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validity of Poststroke Gait Spatiotemporal and Joint Excursion Metrics Between Inertial Measurement Units and a Marker-Based System.

People with chronic stroke often walk with altered spatiotemporal parameters and joint excursions, metrics that can serve as intervention targets. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) allow such metrics to be quantified outside of a traditional motion capture laboratory. The purpose of this study was to quantify the validity of common poststroke biomechanical gait metrics between an IMU-based and a marker-based system during treadmill walking, a context that facilitates gait training interventions. For 61 people with chronic stroke, we assessed the validity of stride duration, stride length, and sagittal plane joint excursions of the bilateral hip, knee, and ankle in 2 ways: (1) Across participants, revealing whether both systems similarly characterize participants' average gait parameters; and (2) Within participants, revealing whether both systems similarly quantify stride-by-stride variance. Across participants, all joint metrics had either excellent (Lin correlation coefficient; LCC > .75) or good (LCC .60-.74) validity, suggesting that IMU-derived metrics that are often the target of treatment can be appropriately compared to existing population norms. In contrast, median validity within participants was excellent for stride duration, but only poor (LCC < .40) to fair (LCC .40-.59) for stride length and most joint excursions. Therefore, IMU-derived gait metrics quantified on a stride-by-stride basis should be interpreted cautiously.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Applied Biomechanics
Journal of Applied Biomechanics 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal of Applied Biomechanics (JAB) is to disseminate the highest quality peer-reviewed studies that utilize biomechanical strategies to advance the study of human movement. Areas of interest include clinical biomechanics, gait and posture mechanics, musculoskeletal and neuromuscular biomechanics, sport mechanics, and biomechanical modeling. Studies of sport performance that explicitly generalize to broader activities, contribute substantially to fundamental understanding of human motion, or are in a sport that enjoys wide participation, are welcome. Also within the scope of JAB are studies using biomechanical strategies to investigate the structure, control, function, and state (health and disease) of animals.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信