AUTHOR=Zahn Annalena , Koch Veronika , Schreff Lucas , Oschmann Patrick , Winkler Jürgen , Gaßner Heiko , Müller Roy TITLE=Validity of an inertial sensor-based system for the assessment of spatio-temporal parameters in people with multiple sclerosis JOURNAL=Frontiers in Neurology VOLUME=14 YEAR=2023 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neurology/articles/10.3389/fneur.2023.1164001 DOI=10.3389/fneur.2023.1164001 ISSN=1664-2295 ABSTRACT=Background

Gait variability in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) reflects disease progression or may be used to evaluate treatment response. To date, marker-based camera systems are considered as gold standard to analyze gait impairment in PwMS. These systems might provide reliable data but are limited to a restricted laboratory setting and require knowledge, time, and cost to correctly interpret gait parameters. Inertial mobile sensors might be a user-friendly, environment- and examiner-independent alternative. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of an inertial sensor-based gait analysis system in PwMS compared to a marker-based camera system.

Methods

A sample N = 39 PwMS and N = 19 healthy participants were requested to repeatedly walk a defined distance at three different self-selected walking speeds (normal, fast, slow). To measure spatio-temporal gait parameters (i.e., walking speed, stride time, stride length, the duration of the stance and swing phase as well as max toe clearance), an inertial sensor system as well as a marker-based camera system were used simultaneously.

Results

All gait parameters highly correlated between both systems (r > 0.84) with low errors. No bias was detected for stride time. Stance time was marginally overestimated (bias = −0.02 ± 0.03 s) and gait speed (bias = 0.03 ± 0.05 m/s), swing time (bias = 0.02 ± 0.02 s), stride length (0.04 ± 0.06 m), and max toe clearance (bias = 1.88 ± 2.35 cm) were slightly underestimated by the inertial sensors.

Discussion

The inertial sensor-based system captured appropriately all examined gait parameters in comparison to a gold standard marker-based camera system. Stride time presented an excellent agreement. Furthermore, stride length and velocity presented also low errors. Whereas for stance and swing time, marginally worse results were observed.