2010Medical Engineering & PhysicsRequires access

Comparison between kinematic and ground reaction force techniques for determining gait events during treadmill walking at different walking speeds

Rita M. Kiss

Open publisher page 41 citations

Abstract

This study involved a comparison of kinematics-based and ground reaction force (GRF)-based event detection methods. The objectives were (1) to assess the difference between the determination of gait events from GRF-based and kinematic/ultrasound-based techniques and (2) to determine the effects of gait speed on the agreement between the two techniques. At combined speeds, the average of the true difference was 2.6+/-2.8 ms for heel strike and -1.3+/-2.4 ms for toe-off identification. A positive value indicated that GRF-based identification occurred before kinematics-based identification. The average of the true difference was -3.9+/-3.5 ms for the duration of stance; thus, the duration of stance as determined by the kinematics-based technique was shorter than that determined by GFR-based detection. Strong correlations (range 0.948-0.974) were found at all (slow, moderate, and fast) gait speeds. Near unity of slope of the linear regression line (range 0.955-1.008) was identified for the duration of stance between the two methods. Our results suggest that the agreement between the two event detection methods depended on gait speed, but the differences were small. The data determined using kinematic/ultrasound-based and GRF-based methods were comparable in healthy participants.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study involved a comparison of kinematics-based and ground reaction force (GRF)-based event detection methods. The objectives were (1) to assess the difference between the determination of gait events from GRF-based and kinematic/ultrasound-based techniques and (2) to determine the effects of gait speed on the agreement between the two techniques. At combined speeds, the average of the true difference was 2.6+/-2.8 ms for heel strike and -1.3+/-2.4 ms for toe-off identification. A positive value indicated that GRF-based identification occurred before kinematics-based identification. The average of the true difference was -3.9+/-3.5 ms for the duration of stance; thus, the duration of stance as determined by the kinematics-based technique was shorter than that determined by GFR-based detection. Strong correlations (range 0.948-0.974) were found at all (slow, moderate, and fast) gait speeds. Near unity of slope of the linear regression line (range 0.955-1.008) was identified for the duration of stance between the two methods. Our results suggest that the agreement between the two event detection methods depended on gait speed, but the differences were small. The data determined using kinematic/ultrasound-based and GRF-based methods were comparable in healthy participants.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 41 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This study involved a comparison of kinematics-based and ground reaction force (GRF)-based event detection methods. The objectives were (1) to assess the difference between the determination of gait events from GRF-based and kinematic/ultrasound-based techniques and (2) to determine the effects of gait speed on the agreement between the two techniques. At combined speeds, the average of the true difference was 2.6+/-2.8 ms for heel strike and -1.3+/-2.4 ms for toe-off identification. A positive value indicated that GRF-based identification occurred before kinematics-based identification. The average of the true difference was -3.9+/-3.5 ms for the duration of stance; thus, the duration of stance as determined by the kinematics-based technique was shorter than that determined by GFR-based detection. Strong correlations (range 0.948-0.974) were found at all (slow, moderate, and fast) gait speeds. Near unity of slope of the linear regression line (range 0.955-1.008) was identified for the duration of stance between the two methods. Our results suggest that the agreement between the two event detection methods depended on gait speed, but the differences were small. The data determined using kinematic/ultrasound-based and GRF-based methods were comparable in healthy participants.

Key concepts: Kinematics, Ground reaction force, Gait, Treadmill, Gait analysis, Biomechanics, Force platform, Physical medicine and rehabilitation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison between kinematic and ground reaction force techniques for determining gait events during treadmill walking at different walking speeds — Research Paper | ScholarLens