80
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Gait analysis methods in rehabilitation

      review-article
      1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ,
      Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Brand's four reasons for clinical tests and his analysis of the characteristics of valid biomechanical tests for use in orthopaedics are taken as a basis for determining what methodologies are required for gait analysis in a clinical rehabilitation context.

          Measurement methods in clinical gait analysis

          The state of the art of optical systems capable of measuring the positions of retro-reflective markers placed on the skin is sufficiently advanced that they are probably no longer a significant source of error in clinical gait analysis. Determining the anthropometry of the subject and compensating for soft tissue movement in relation to the under-lying bones are now the principal problems. Techniques for using functional tests to determine joint centres and axes of rotation are starting to be used successfully. Probably the last great challenge for optical systems is in using computational techniques to compensate for soft tissue measurements. In the long term future it is possible that direct imaging of bones and joints in three dimensions (using MRI or fluoroscopy) may replace marker based systems.

          Methods for interpreting gait analysis data

          There is still not an accepted general theory of why we walk the way we do. In the absence of this, many explanations of walking address the mechanisms by which specific movements are achieved by particular muscles. A whole new methodology is developing to determine the functions of individual muscles. This needs further development and validation. A particular requirement is for subject specific models incorporating 3-dimensional imaging data of the musculo-skeletal anatomy with kinematic and kinetic data.

          Methods for understanding the effects of intervention

          Clinical gait analysis is extremely limited if it does not allow clinicians to choose between alternative possible interventions or to predict outcomes. This can be achieved either by rigorously planned clinical trials or using theoretical models. The evidence base is generally poor partly because of the limited number of prospective clinical trials that have been completed and more such studies are essential. Very recent work has started to show the potential of using models of the mechanisms by which people with pathology walk in order to simulate different potential interventions. The development of these models offers considerable promise for new clinical applications of gait analysis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references92

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Repeatability of kinematic, kinetic, and electromyographic data in normal adult gait.

          The repeatability of gait variables is an important consideration in the clinical use of results of quantitative gait analysis. Statistical measures were used to evaluate repeatability of kinematic, kinetic, and electromyographic data waveforms and spatiotemporal parameters of 40 normal subjects. Subjects were evaluated three times on each test day and on three different test days while walking at their preferred or natural speed. Intrasubject repeatability was excellent for kinematic data in the sagittal plane both within a test day as well as between test days. For joint angle motion in the frontal and transverse planes, the repeatability was good within a test day and poor between test days. Poor between-day repeatability of joint angle motion in the frontal and transverse planes was noted to be partly due to variabilities in the alignment of markers. Vertical reaction and fore-aft shear forces were more repeatable than the mediolateral shear force. Sagittal plane joint moments were more repeatable than frontal or transverse plane moments. For electromyographic data, repeatability within a day was slightly better than between test days. In general, the results demonstrate that with the subjects walking at their natural or preferred speed, the gait variables are quite repeatable. These observations suggest that it may be reasonable to base significant clinical decisions on the results of a single gait evaluation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry. Part 3. Soft tissue artifact assessment and compensation.

            When using optoelectronic stereophotogrammetry, skin deformation and displacement causes marker movement with respect to the underlying bone. This movement represents an artifact, which affects the estimation of the skeletal system kinematics, and is regarded as the most critical source of error in human movement analysis. A comprehensive review of the state-of-the-art for assessment, minimization and compensation of the soft tissue artifact (STA) is provided. It has been shown that STA is greater than the instrumental error associated with stereophotogrammetry, has a frequency content similar to the actual bone movement, is task dependent and not reproducible among subjects and, of lower limb segments, is greatest at the thigh. It has been shown that in in vivo experiments only motion about the flexion/extension axis of the hip, knees and ankles can be determined reliably. Motion about other axes at those joints should be regarded with much more caution as this artifact produces spurious effects with magnitudes comparable to the amount of motion actually occurring in those joints. Techniques designed to minimize the contribution of and compensate for the effects of this artifact can be divided up into those which model the skin surface and those which include joint motion constraints. Despite the numerous solutions proposed, the objective of reliable estimation of 3D skeletal system kinematics using skin markers has not yet been satisfactorily achieved and greatly limits the contribution of human movement analysis to clinical practice and biomechanical research. For STA to be compensated for effectively, it is here suggested that either its subject-specific pattern is assessed by ad hoc exercises or it is characterized from a large series of measurements on different subject populations. Alternatively, inclusion of joint constraints into a more general STA minimization approach may provide an acceptable solution.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Contributions of the individual ankle plantar flexors to support, forward progression and swing initiation during walking.

              Walking is a motor task requiring coordination of many muscles. Previous biomechanical studies, based primarily on analyses of the net ankle moment during stance, have concluded different functional roles for the plantar flexors. We hypothesize that some of the disparities in interpretation arise because of the effects of the uniarticular and biarticular muscles that comprise the plantar flexor group have not been separated. Furthermore, we believe that an accurate determination of muscle function requires quantification of the contributions of individual plantar flexor muscles to the energetics of individual body segments. In this study, we examined the individual contributions of the ankle plantar flexors (gastrocnemius (GAS); soleus (SOL)) to the body segment energetics using a musculoskeletal model and optimization framework to generate a forward dynamics simulation of normal walking at 1.5 m/s. At any instant in the gait cycle, the contribution of a muscle to support and forward progression was defined by its contribution to trunk vertical and horizontal acceleration, respectively, and its contribution to swing initiation by the mechanical energy it delivers to the leg in pre-swing (i.e., double-leg stance prior to toe-off). GAS and SOL were both found to provide trunk support during single-leg stance and pre-swing. In early single-leg stance, undergoing eccentric and isometric activity, they accelerate the trunk vertically but decelerate forward trunk progression. In mid single-leg stance, while isometric, GAS delivers energy to the leg while SOL decelerates it, and SOL delivers energy to the trunk while GAS decelerates it. In late single-leg stance through pre-swing, though GAS and SOL both undergo concentric activity and accelerate the trunk forward while decelerating the downward motion of the trunk (i.e., providing forward progression and support), they execute different energetic functions. The energy produced from SOL accelerates the trunk forward, whereas GAS delivers almost all its energy to accelerate the leg to initiate swing. Although GAS and SOL maintain or accelerate forward motion in mid single-leg stance through pre-swing, other muscles acting at the beginning of stance contribute comparably to forward progression. In summary, throughout single-leg stance both SOL and GAS provide vertical support, in mid single-leg stance SOL and GAS have opposite energetic effects on the leg and trunk to ensure support and forward progression of both the leg and trunk, and in pre-swing only GAS contributes to swing initiation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Neuroengineering Rehabil
                Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
                BioMed Central (London )
                1743-0003
                2006
                2 March 2006
                : 3
                : 4
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Hugh Williamson Gait Analysis Service, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
                [2 ]Gait CCRE, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
                [3 ]Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
                [4 ]Musculoskeletal Research Centre, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia
                Article
                1743-0003-3-4
                10.1186/1743-0003-3-4
                1421413
                16512912
                2ce0498a-c261-46fd-af8c-380f5f719a07
                Copyright © 2006 Baker; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 April 2005
                : 2 March 2006
                Categories
                Review

                Neurosciences
                Neurosciences

                Comments

                Comment on this article