Static and dynamic validation of inertial measurement units

Taylor, Leah K.; Miller, Emily; Kaufman, Kenton R.

doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.05.026

Cited by 29 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study, APDM IMU wearable sensors were able to perform fairly well under certain conditions and were less accurate in other conditions. Of note is the marked improvement in accuracy when measuring small angular displacement in both abduction/adduction and internal/external rotation, an observation similar to that observed by Taylor et al [39]. It is possible that these sensors may be able to monitor less dynamic movements more accurately.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Validation of a Device to Measure Knee Joint Angles for a Dynamic Movement

Ajdaroski

Tadakala

Nichols

et al. 2020

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participation in sports has risen in the United States over the last few years, increasing the risk of injuries such as tears to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in the knee. Previous studies have shown a correlation between knee kinematics when landing from a jump and this injury. The purpose of this study was to validate the ability of a commercially available inertial measurement units (IMUs) to accurately measure knee joint angles during a dynamic movement. Eight healthy subjects participated in the study. Validation was performed by comparing the angles measured by the wearable device to those obtained through the gold standard motion capture system when landing from a jump. Root mean square, linear regression analysis, and Bland–Altman plots were performed/constructed. The mean difference between the wearable device and the motion capture data was 8.4° (flexion/extension), 4.9° (ab/adduction), and 3.9° (rotation). In addition, the device was more accurate at smaller knee angles. In our study, a commercially available wearable IMU was able to perform fairly well under certain conditions and was less accurate in other conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Validation of a Device to Measure Knee Joint Angles for a Dynamic Movement

Ajdaroski

Tadakala

Nichols

et al. 2020

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years, there has been increased interest in finding alternatives for the evaluation of mobility, among which inertial measurement units (IMUs) stand out because of their portability, size, and relatively low price [ 1 ]. Most publications that include a validation of an IMU compare its performance with optical motion-capture systems [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]. So far, the gold standards for gait analysis are optical motion capture systems, force platforms, and plantar pressure platforms, but these systems are expensive, space limited, and time consuming due to the placement of markers on the test subject.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy and Repeatability of Spatiotemporal Gait Parameters Measured with an Inertial Measurement Unit

Posada-Ordax

Cosín-Matamoros

Iglesias

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, interest in finding alternatives for the evaluation of mobility has increased. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) stand out for their portability, size, and low price. The objective of this study was to examine the accuracy and repeatability of a commercially available IMU under controlled conditions in healthy subjects. A total of 36 subjects, including 17 males and 19 females were analyzed with a Wiva Science IMU in a corridor test while walking for 10 m and in a threadmill at 1.6 km/h, 2.4 km/h, 3.2 km/h, 4 km/h, and 4.8 km/h for one minute. We found no difference when we compared the variables at 4 km/h and 4.8 km/h. However, we found greater differences and errors at 1.6 km/h, 2.4 km/h and 3.2 km/h, and the latter one (1.6 km/h) generated more error. The main conclusion is that the Wiva Science IMU is reliable at high speeds but loses reliability at low speeds.

show abstract

“…5 Hence, simpler and more cost-effective gait analysis methods are being constantly sought. [9][10][11][12][13] These approaches may forego some of the advanced high-fidelity measurement of instrumented gait laboratories, for simpler and clinically appropriate systems. 14 Two-dimensional (2D) video motion capture dates back to the origins of gait analysis, more than a century ago.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two-dimensional video gait analysis

Michelini

Eshraghi

Andrysek

2020

Prosthetics &Amp; Orthotics International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Motion capture systems are widely used to quantify human gait. Two-dimensional (2D) video systems are simple to use, easily accessible, and affordable. However, their performance as compared to other systems (i.e. three-dimensional (3D) gait analysis) is not well established. Objectives: This work provides a comprehensive review of design specifications and performance characteristics (validity and reliability) of two-dimensional motion capture systems. Study design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in three databases from 1990 to 2019 and identified 30 research articles that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Results: Reliability of measurements of two-dimensional video motion capture was found to vary greatly from poor to excellent. Results relating to validity were also highly variable. Comparisons between the studies were challenging due to differences in protocols, instrumentation, parameters assessed, and analyses performed. Conclusions: Variability in performance could be attributed to study design, gait parameters being measured, and technical aspects. The latter includes camera specifications (i.e. resolution and frame rate), setup (i.e. camera position), and analysis software. Given the variability in performance, additional validation testing may be needed for specific applications involving clinical or research-based assessments, including specific patient populations, gait parameters, mobility tasks, and data collection protocols. Clinical relevance This review article provides guidance on the application of 2D video gait analysis in a clinical or research setting. While not suitable in all instances, 2D gait analysis has promise in specific applications. Recommendations are provided about the patient populations, gait parameters, mobility tasks, and data collection protocols.

show abstract

Static and dynamic validation of inertial measurement units

Cited by 29 publications

References 10 publications

Validation of a Device to Measure Knee Joint Angles for a Dynamic Movement

Validation of a Device to Measure Knee Joint Angles for a Dynamic Movement

Accuracy and Repeatability of Spatiotemporal Gait Parameters Measured with an Inertial Measurement Unit

Two-dimensional video gait analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About