Toward Pervasive Gait Analysis With Wearable Sensors: A Systematic Review

Gait analysis has traditionally been carried out in a laboratory environment using expensive equipment, but, recently, reliable, affordable, and wearable sensors have enabled integration into clinical applications as well as use during activities of daily living. Real-time gait analysis is key to the development of gait rehabilitation techniques and assistive devices such as neuroprostheses. This article presents a systematic review of wearable sensors and techniques used in real-time gait analysis, and their application to pathological gait. From four major scientific databases, we identified 1262 articles of which 113 were analyzed in full-text. We found that heel strike and toe off are the most sought-after gait events. Inertial measurement units (IMU) are the most widely used wearable sensors and the shank and foot are the preferred placements. Insole pressure sensors are the most common sensors for ground-truth validation for IMU-based gait detection. Rule-based techniques relying on threshold or peak detection are the most widely used gait detection method. The heterogeneity of evaluation criteria prevented quantitative performance comparison of all methods. Although most studies predicted that the proposed methods would work on pathological gait, less than one third were validated on such data. Clinical applications of gait detection algorithms were considered, and we recommend a combination of IMU and rule-based methods as an optimal solution.

Download Full-text

Latest Research Trends in Gait Analysis Using Wearable Sensors and Machine Learning: A Systematic Review

IEEE Access ◽

10.1109/access.2020.3022818 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 ◽

pp. 167830-167864

Author(s):

Abdul Saboor ◽

Triin Kask ◽

Alar Kuusik ◽

Muhammad Mahtab Alam ◽

Yannick Le Moullec ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Machine Learning ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Gait Analysis ◽

Wearable Sensors ◽

Research Trends

Download Full-text

Reliability of activity monitors for physical activity assessment in patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review

Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation ◽

10.3233/bmr-200348 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-9

Author(s):

Francesco Negrini ◽

Alessandro de Sire ◽

Stefano Giuseppe Lazzarini ◽

Federico Pennestrì ◽

Salvatore Sorce ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Musculoskeletal Disorders ◽

Wearable Sensors ◽

Activity Monitors ◽

Activity Assessment ◽

Measurement Tools ◽

Different Types ◽

Measurement Units ◽

Full Text Screening

BACKGROUND: Activity monitors have been introduced in the last years to objectively measure physical activity to help physicians in the management of musculoskeletal patients. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed at describing the assessment of physical activity by commercially available portable activity monitors in patients with musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, PEDro, Web of Science, Scopus and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched from inception to June 11th, 2020. We considered as eligible observational studies with: musculoskeletal patients; physical activity measured by wearable sensors based on inertial measurement units; comparisons performed with other tools; outcomes consisting of number of steps/day, activity/inactivity time, or activity counts/day. RESULTS: Out of 595 records, after removing duplicates, title/abstract and full text screening, 10 articles were included. We noticed a wide heterogeneity in the wearable devices, that resulted to be 10 different types. Patients included suffered from rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica, and fibromyalgia. Only 3 studies compared portable activity trackers with objective measurement tools. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, this systematic review showed that activity monitors might be considered as useful to assess physical activity in patients with musculoskeletal disorders, albeit, to date, the high device heterogeneity and the different algorithms still prevent their standardization.

Download Full-text

How wearable sensors have been utilised to evaluate frailty in older adults: a systematic review

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation ◽

10.1186/s12984-021-00909-0 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Grainne Vavasour ◽

Oonagh M. Giggins ◽

Julie Doyle ◽

Daniel Kelly

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Older Adults ◽

Gait Speed ◽

Outcome Measurement ◽

Wearable Sensors ◽

Adverse Outcomes ◽

Community Dwelling ◽

Ageing Population ◽

Application Development ◽

Community Dwelling Older Adults

Abstract Background Globally the population of older adults is increasing. It is estimated that by 2050 the number of adults over the age of 60 will represent over 21% of the world’s population. Frailty is a clinical condition associated with ageing resulting in an increase in adverse outcomes. It is considered the greatest challenge facing an ageing population affecting an estimated 16% of community-dwelling populations worldwide. Aim The aim of this systematic review is to explore how wearable sensors have been used to assess frailty in older adults. Method Electronic databases Medline, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL were systematically searched March 2020 and November 2020. A search constraint of articles published in English, between January 2010 and November 2020 was applied. Papers included were primary observational studies involving; older adults aged > 60 years, used a wearable sensor to provide quantitative measurements of physical activity (PA) or mobility and a measure of frailty. Studies were excluded if they used non-wearable sensors for outcome measurement or outlined an algorithm or application development exclusively. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-sectional Studies (AXIS). Results Twenty-nine studies examining the use of wearable sensors to assess and discriminate between stages of frailty in older adults were included. Thirteen different body-worn sensors were used in eight different body-locations. Participants were community-dwelling older adults. Studies were performed in home, laboratory or hospital settings. Postural transitions, number of steps, percentage of time in PA and intensity of PA together were the most frequently measured parameters followed closely by gait speed. All but one study demonstrated an association between PA and level of frailty. All reports of gait speed indicate correlation with frailty. Conclusions Wearable sensors have been successfully used to evaluate frailty in older adults. Further research is needed to identify a feasible, user-friendly device and body-location that can be used to identify signs of pre-frailty in community-dwelling older adults. This would facilitate early identification and targeted intervention to reduce the burden of frailty in an ageing population.

Download Full-text