Assessment of Stability of MIMU Probes to Skin-Marker-Based Anatomical Reference Frames During Locomotion Tasks: Effect of Different Locations on the Lower Limb

Abstract

Soft tissue artefacts (STAs) undermine the validity of skin-mounted approaches to measure skeletal kinematics. Magneto-inertial measurement units (MIMU) gained popularity due to their low cost and ease of use. Although the reliability of different protocols for marker-based joint kinematics estimation has been widely reported, there are still no indications on where to place MIMU to minimize STA. This study aims to find the most stable positions for MIMU placement, among four positions on the thigh, four on the shank, and three on the foot. Stability was investigated by measuring MIMU movements against an anatomical reference frame, defined according to a standard marker-based approach. To this aim, markers were attached both on the case of each MIMU (technical frame) and on bony landmarks (anatomical frame). For each MIMU, the nine angles between each versor of the technical frame with each versor of the corresponding anatomical frame were computed. The maximum standard deviation of these angles was assumed as the instability index of MIMU-body coupling. Six healthy subjects were asked to perform barefoot gait, step negotiation, and sit-to-stand. Results showed that (1) in the thigh, the frontal position was the most stable in all tasks, especially in gait; (2) in the shank, the proximal position is the least stable, (3) lateral or medial calcaneus and foot dorsum positions showed equivalent stability performances. Further studies should be done before generalizing these conclusions to different motor tasks and MIMU-body fixation methods. The above results are of interest for both MIMU-based gait analysis and rehabilitation approaches using wearable sensors-based biofeedback.

Machine learning based estimation of dynamic balance and gait adaptability in persons with neurological diseases using inertial sensors

“…The position of the shank sensors was chosen as it was the one associated with less sensor instability, due to soft tissue artifacts. In particular, report of a decrease of 4–51% artifacts were found compared to placing IMUs in other parts of the shank or of the feet 70 . The sensors were fixed to the body by elastic bands with Velcro strips, which can also be easily applied by the subject autonomously or with the help of a caregiver.…”

Three-Dimensional Lower-Limb Kinematics from Accelerometers and Gyroscopes with Simple and Minimal Functional Calibration Tasks: Validation on Asymptomatic Participants

“…The IMUs were positioned on the lower back (at sacrum level, in the middle and below the posterior superior iliac spines), the thighs (on the lateral side), the shanks (on the anterior and medial side) and the feet (on the top) ( Figure 1 ). These locations were chosen as they are supposed to provide limited soft tissue artifacts [ 14 ]. Double-sided adhesive tape and elastic bands (SuperWrap straps, Qualisys, Göteborg, Sweden) were used to firmly fix the clusters and the IMUs on the participant’s body ( Figure 1 ).…”

Three-Dimensional Lower Limb Kinematics from Accelerometers and Gyroscopes with Simple and Minimal Functional Calibration Tasks: Validation on Asymptomatic Participants

“…The IMUs were positioned on the lower back (at sacrum level, in the middle and below the posterior superior iliac spines), the thighs (on the lateral side), the shanks (on the anterior and medial side) and the feet (on the top) (Figure 1). These locations were chosen as they were supposed to provide limited soft tissue artifacts [11]. Double-sided adhesive tape and elastic bands (SuperWrap straps, Qualisys, Göteborg, Sweden) were used to firmly fix the clusters and the IMUs on the participant's body (Figure 1).…”