Department of Neurology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA; APDM, Inc., Portland, OR, USA.
Gait Posture. 2021 Feb;84:108-113. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.11.024. Epub 2020 Nov 25.
There is currently no consensus about standardized gait bout definitions when passively monitoring walking during normal daily life activities. It is also not known how different definitions of a gait bout in daily life monitoring affects the ability to distinguish pathological gait quality. Specifically, how many seconds of a pause with no walking indicates an end to one gait bout and the start of another bout? In this study, we investigated the effect of 3 gait bout definitions on the discriminative ability to distinguish quality of walking in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) from healthy control subjects (HC) during a week of daily living.
15 subjects with MS and 16 HC wore instrumented socks on each foot and one Opal sensor over the lower lumbar area for a week of daily activities for at least 8 h/day. Three gait bout definitions were based on the length of the pause between the end of one gait bout and start of another bout (1.25 s, 2.50 s, and 5.0 s pause). Area under the curve (AUC) was used to compare gait quality measures in MS versus HC.
Total number of gait bouts over the week were statistically significantly different across bout definitions, as expected. However, AUCs of gait quality measures (such as gait speed, stride length, stride time) discriminating people with MS from HC were not different despite the 3 bout definitions.
Quality of gait measures that discriminate MS from HC during daily life are not influenced by the length of a gait bout, despite large differences in quantity of gait across bout definitions. Thus, gait quality measures in people with MS versus controls can be compared across studies using different gait bout definitions with pause lengths ≤5 s.
目前,在被动监测日常活动中的行走时,对于标准化步态回合的定义尚未达成共识。也不知道日常生活监测中步态回合的不同定义如何影响区分病理性步态质量的能力。具体来说,多长时间没有行走的停顿会指示一个步态回合的结束和另一个回合的开始?在这项研究中,我们研究了 3 种步态回合定义对区分多发性硬化症(MS)患者和健康对照(HC)在一周日常活动中行走质量的影响。
15 名 MS 患者和 16 名 HC 患者在一周的日常活动中,每只脚穿上带仪器的袜子,在腰骶区佩戴一个 Opal 传感器,每天至少 8 小时。三种步态回合定义基于一个步态回合结束和另一个回合开始之间的停顿长度(1.25 s、2.50 s 和 5.0 s 停顿)。使用曲线下面积(AUC)比较 MS 与 HC 的步态质量测量值。
正如预期的那样,一周内的总步态回合数在回合定义之间存在统计学显著差异。然而,尽管有 3 种回合定义,但区分 MS 与 HC 的步态质量测量指标(如步态速度、步长、步时)的 AUC 没有差异。
尽管在回合定义下的步态回合数量存在很大差异,但区分 MS 与 HC 的日常行走步态质量测量值不受步态回合长度的影响。因此,使用暂停长度≤5 s 的不同步态回合定义,可以在不同研究中比较 MS 患者与对照组之间的步态质量测量值。