Despite existing evidence that gait disorders are a common consequence of severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI), the literature describing gait instability in sTBI survivors is scant. Thus, the present study aims at quantifying gait patterns in sTBI through wearable inertial sensors and investigating the association of sensor-based gait quality indices with the scores of commonly administered clinical scales. Twenty healthy adults (control group, CG) and 20 people who suffered from a sTBI were recruited. The Berg balance scale, community balance and mobility scale, and dynamic gait index (DGI) were administered to sTBI participants, who were further divided into two subgroups, severe and very severe, according to their score in the DGI. Participants performed the 10 m walk, the Figure-of-8 walk, and the Fukuda stepping tests, while wearing five inertial sensors. Significant differences were found among the three groups, discriminating not only between CG and sTBI, but also for walking ability levels. Several indices displayed a significant correlation with clinical scales scores, especially in the 10 m walking and Figure-of-8 walk tests. Results show that the use of wearable sensors allows the obtainment of quantitative information about a patient’s gait disorders and discrimination between different levels of walking abilities, supporting the rehabilitative staff in designing tailored therapeutic interventions.

Wearable technologies are often indicated as tools that can enable the in-field collection of quantitative biomechanical data, unobtrusively, for extended periods of time, and with few spatial limitations. Despite many claims about their potential for impact in the area of injury prevention and management, there seems to be little attention to grounding this potential in biomechanical research linking quantities from wearables to musculoskeletal injuries, and to assessing the readiness of these biomechanical approaches for being implemented in real practice. We performed a systematic scoping review to characterise and critically analyse the state of the art of research using wearable technologies to study musculoskeletal injuries in sport from a biomechanical perspective. A total of 4952 articles were retrieved from the Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases; 165 were included. Multiple study features—such as research design, scope, experimental settings, and applied context—were summarised and assessed. We also proposed an injury-research readiness classification tool to gauge the maturity of biomechanical approaches using wearables. Five main conclusions emerged from this review, which we used as a springboard to propose guidelines and good practices for future research and dissemination in the field.

Overuse-related musculoskeletal injuries mostly affect athletes, especially if involved in preseason conditioning, and military populations; they may also occur, however, when pathological or biological conditions render the musculoskeletal system inadequate to cope with a mechanical load, even if moderate. Within the MOVIDA (Motor function and Vitamin D: toolkit for risk Assessment and prediction) Project, funded by the Italian Ministry of Defence, a systematic review of the literature was conducted to support the development of a transportable toolkit (instrumentation, protocols and reference/risk thresholds) to help characterize the risk of overuse-related musculoskeletal injury. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) approach was used to analyze Review papers indexed in PubMed and published in the period 2010 to 2020. The search focused on stress (overuse) fracture or injuries, and muscle fatigue in the lower limbs in association with functional (biomechanical) or biological biomarkers. A total of 225 Review papers were retrieved: 115 were found eligible for full text analysis and led to another 141 research papers derived from a second-level search. A total of 183 papers were finally chosen for analysis: 74 were classified as introductory to the topics, 109 were analyzed in depth. Qualitative and, wherever possible, quantitative syntheses were carried out with respect to the literature review process and quality, injury epidemiology (type and location of injuries, and investigated populations), risk factors, assessment techniques and assessment protocols.

No abstract