Less Is More – Estimation of the Number of Strides Required to Assess Gait Variability in Spatially Confined Settings

Abstract

Background: Gait variability is an established marker of gait function that can be assessed using sensor-based approaches. In clinical settings, spatial constraints and patient condition impede the execution of longer distance walks for the recording of gait parameters. Turning paradigms are often used to overcome these constraints and commercial gait analysis systems algorithmically exclude turns for gait parameters calculations. We investigated the effect of turns in sensor-based assessment of gait variability.Methods: Continuous recordings from 31 patients with movement disorders (ataxia, essential tremor and Parkinson’s disease) and 162 healthy elderly (HE) performing level walks including 180° turns were obtained using an inertial sensor system. Accuracy of the manufacturer’s algorithm of turn-detection was verified by plotting stride time series. Strides before and after turn events were extracted and compared to respective average of all strides. Coefficient of variation (CoV) of stride length and stride time was calculated for entire set of strides, segments between turns and as cumulative values. Their variance and congruency was used to estimate the number of strides required to reliably assess the magnitude of stride variability.Results: Non-detection of turns in 5.8% of HE lead to falsely increased CoV for these individuals. Even after exclusion of these, strides before/after turns tended to be spatially shorter and temporally longer in all groups, contributing to an increase of CoV at group level and widening of confidence margins with increasing numbers of strides. This could be attenuated by a more generous turn excision as an alternative approach. Correlation analyses revealed excellent consistency for CoVs after at most 20 strides in all groups. Respective stride counts were even lower in patients using a more generous turn excision.Conclusion: Including turns to increase continuous walking distance in spatially confined settings does not necessarily improve the validity and reliability of gait variability measures. Specifically with gait pathology, perturbations of stride characteristics before/after algorithmically excised turns were observed that may increase gait variability with this paradigm. We conclude that shorter distance walks of around 15 strides suffice for reliable and valid recordings of gait variability in the groups studied here.

Paving the Way Toward Distinguishing Fallers From Non-fallers in Bilateral Vestibulopathy: A Wide Pilot Observation

“…Although the total number of steps used to calculate the standard deviations seems low, step-to-step variability can be reliably assessed using <15 steps ( 36 , 37 ). Gait parameters were considered as absolute.…”

Association Between Fatigue and Motor Exertion in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis—a Prospective Study

“…Gait parameters were calculated by the manufacturer's (APDM Inc., USA) algorithm for the plugin "Iwalk" (version 2.0) which provides algorithmic exclusion of the first steps of each walk and algorithmic definition of steps in turn. All trials were inspected for correct excision of turns (25). We additionally excluded the last stride of each trial and used only recordings with a minimum of six gait cycles.…”

Instrumental Assessment of Stepping in Place Captures Clinically Relevant Motor Symptoms of Parkinson’s Disease

“…Variability of stepping, specifically step and stride timing during gait, forms a separate domain of gait as conceptualized by Lord et al [ 32 ], which has gained increasing interest in the assessment of PWPD [ 16 , 37 ]. We therefore included arrhythmicity of stepping, similar to the coefficient of variance for step or stride time that is used as common descriptor in gait analysis, which is sensitive to number of steps, as well as the gait paradigm used for recording [ 38 ]. Although the similarity of SIP movement to stepping during gait is intriguing, we are aware of only one small study [ 23 ] which compared cadence from SIP and gait recordings.…”