School of Health and Society, University of Salford, Manchester, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2022 Aug 22;17(8):e0273308. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273308. eCollection 2022.
The use of portable gait measurement systems in research is appealing to collect real-world data at low-cost, low participant burden, and without requirement for dedicated lab space. Most commercially available inertial measurement units (IMU's) designed for running only capture temporospatial data, the ability to capture biomechanics data such as shock and motion metrics with the RunScribe IMU makes it the closest to a lab alternative. The RunScribe system has been validated in running, however, is yet to be validated for walking.
Qualisys motion capture, AMTI force plates, and Delsys Trigno accelerometers were used as gold standard lab measures for comparison against the RunScribe IMU. Twenty participants completed 10 footsteps per foot (20 total) measured by both systems simultaneously. Variables for validation included: Vertical Ground reaction force (GRF), instantaneous GRF rate, pronation excursion, pronation velocity, total shock, impact force, braking force. Interclass correlation (ICC) was used to determine agreement between the measurement systems, mean differences were used to evaluate group level accuracy.
ICC results showed moderate agreement between measurement systems when both limbs were averaged. The greatest agreement was seen for GRF rate, pronation excursion, and pronation velocity (ICC = 0.627, 0.616, 0.539), low agreement was seen for GRF, total shock, impact shock, braking shock (ICC = 0.269, 0.351, 0.244, 0.180). However mean differences show the greatest level of accuracy for GRF, GRF rate, and impact shock.
Results show mixed agreement between the RunScribe and gold standard lab measures, and varied agreement across left and right limbs. Kinematic variables showed the greatest agreement, however GRF had the lowest relative mean difference for group results. The results show acceptable levels of agreement for most variables, however further work must be done to assess the repeatability and sensitivity of the RunScribe to be applied within areas such as footwear testing and gait retraining protocols.
使用便携式步态测量系统在研究中很有吸引力，因为它可以以低成本、低参与者负担、无需专用实验室空间来收集真实世界的数据。大多数专为跑步设计的商用惯性测量单元 (IMU) 仅能捕获时空数据，而 RunScribe IMU 具有捕获冲击和运动指标等生物力学数据的能力，使其最接近实验室替代品。RunScribe 系统已在跑步中得到验证，但尚未在步行中得到验证。
采用 Qualisys 运动捕捉、AMTI 力板和 Delsys Trigno 加速度计作为金标准实验室测量方法，与 RunScribe IMU 进行比较。20 名参与者每只脚完成 10 步（共 20 步），由两个系统同时测量。验证的变量包括：垂直地面反作用力 (GRF)、瞬时 GRF 率、旋前偏移、旋前速度、总冲击力、撞击力、制动力。使用组内相关系数 (ICC) 来确定测量系统之间的一致性，使用平均差异来评估组水平的准确性。
ICC 结果显示，当平均双侧肢体时，测量系统之间存在中度一致性。GRF 率、旋前偏移和旋前速度的一致性最高（ICC = 0.627、0.616、0.539），GRF、总冲击力、冲击冲击力、制动冲击力的一致性较低（ICC = 0.269、0.351、0.244、0.180）。然而，平均差异显示出 GRF、GRF 率和冲击冲击力的最高准确性水平。
结果表明，RunScribe 与金标准实验室测量之间的一致性参差不齐，左右肢体之间的一致性也各不相同。运动学变量显示出最大的一致性，然而 GRF 对组结果的相对平均差异最小。结果表明，大多数变量的一致性可接受，但必须进一步研究以评估 RunScribe 的可重复性和敏感性，以便在鞋类测试和步态再训练方案等领域中应用。
