Skip to main content

An evaluation of accuracy and repeatability of a novel gait analysis device

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery volume 127, pages 223–227 (2007)Cite this article

Abstract

Introduction

Restoration of gait is a particularly important patient-based functional outcome following lower extremity trauma. A new portable device which measures gait parameters, the IDEEA, may be particularly useful in evaluating post-traumatic gait parameters in the office setting, but the accuracy and repeatability of this device relative to standard gait laboratory footswitches are unknown.

Material and methods

Twelve healthy subjects were tested simultaneously using the IDEEA device and standard gait laboratory footswitches, at slow, medium, and fast speeds. Parameters evaluated were single-limb support time (SLS), double-limb support time (DLS), swing phase duration (SPD), cycle duration, and cadence.

Results

The repeatability between right and left measurements tended to be better for the IDEEA, and was at least as good as the foot switches. The absolute differences of the timed gait parameters between the two devices were all in the range of 0.03 s, which is within the data sampling resolution of the gait laboratory foot switches (0.04 s). Furthermore, assuming a 1-s gait cycle, these differences account for only 3% of the gait cycle, which is also well within the clinical parameters for evaluating and differentiating between treatments.

Conclusion

This device is accurate and repeatable, and may facilitate the evaluation of gait function in post-traumatic patients in settings outside of the traditional gait laboratory.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Chambers HG, Sutherland DH (2002) A practical guide to gait analysis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 10(3):222–231

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Coleman KL, Smith DG, Boone DA, Joseph AW, del Aguila MA (1999) Step activity monitor: long-term, continuous recording of ambulatory function. J Rehabil Res Dev 36(1):8–18

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Coutts F (1999) Gait analysis in the therapeutic environment. Man Ther 4(1):2–10

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Czerniecki JG, AJ (1996) Gait analysis in the amputee: has it helped the amputee or contributed to the development of improved prosthetic components? Gait Posture 4:258–268

  5. Ghoussayni S, Stevens C, Durham S, Ewins D (2004) Assessment and validation of a simple automated method for the detection of gait events and intervals. Gait Posture 20(3):266–272

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hallberg I, Rosenqvist AM, Kartous L, Lofman O, Wahlstrom O, Toss G (2004) Health-related quality of life after osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 15(10):834–841

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hausdorff JM, Ladin Z, Wei JY (1995) Footswitch system for measurement of the temporal parameters of gait. J Biomech 28(3):347–351

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Koval KJ, Sala DA, Kummer FJ, Zuckerman JD (1998) Postoperative weight-bearing after a fracture of the femoral neck or an intertrochanteric fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80(3):352–356

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Kroll MA, Otis JC, Sculco TP, et al (1989) The relationship of stride characteristics to pain before and after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 239:191–195

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maki BE (1997) Gait changes in older adults: predictors of falls or indicators of fear. J Am Geriatr Soc 45(3):313–320

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Maluf KS, Morley RE Jr., Richter EJ, Klaesner JW, Mueller MJ (2001) Monitoring in-shoe plantar pressures, temperature, and humidity: reliability and validity of measures from a portable device. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82(8):1119–1127

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mangione KK, Craik RL, Tomlinson SS, Palombaro KM (2005) Can elderly patients who have had a hip fracture perform moderate- to high-intensity exercise at home? Phys Ther 85(8):727–739

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mittlmeier T, Morlock MM, Hertlein H, et al (1993) Analysis of morphology and gait function after intraarticular calcaneal fracture. J Orthop Trauma 7(4):303–310

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Perry J (1974) Clinical gait analyzer. Bull Prosthet Res188–192

  15. Randell AG, Nguyen TV, Bhalerao N, Silverman SL, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA (2000) Deterioration in quality of life following hip fracture: a prospective study. Osteoporos Int 11(5):460–466

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Shepherd EF, Toloza E, McClung CD, Schmalzried TP (1999) Step activity monitor: increased accuracy in quantifying ambulatory activity. J Orthop Res 17(5):703–708

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Simon SR 2004 Quantification of human motion: gait analysis-benefits and limitations to its application to clinical problems. J Biomech 37(12):1869–1880

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wall JC, Ashburn A, Klenerman L (1981) Gait analysis in the assessment of functional performance before and after total hip replacement. J Biomed Eng 3(2):121–127

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhang K, Pi-Sunyer FX, Boozer CN 2004 Improving energy expenditure estimation for physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36(5):883–889

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang K, Werner P, Sun M, Pi-Sunyer FX, Boozer CN (2003) Measurement of human daily physical activity. Obes Res 11(1):33–40

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA

    Michael J. Gardner, Joseph U. Barker, Stephen M. Briggs, David L. Helfet, Joseph M. Lane & Dean G. Lorich

  2. Department of Rehabilitation, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, USA

    Sherry I. Backus

Authors
  1. Michael J. Gardner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joseph U. Barker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephen M. Briggs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sherry I. Backus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. David L. Helfet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joseph M. Lane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dean G. Lorich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Gardner.

Additional information

Conflict of Interest Statement: No funding was received by any of the authors for this study.

Ethical Board Review statement: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gardner, M.J., Barker, J.U., Briggs, S.M. et al. An evaluation of accuracy and repeatability of a novel gait analysis device. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 127, 223–227 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-006-0279-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-006-0279-2

Keywords

  • Gait
  • Lower extremity
  • Trauma
  • Functional outcome