Validation of the RunScribe Inertial Measurement Unit for walking gait measurement

Lewin, M ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5633-1250, Price, C ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5633-1250 and Nester, CJ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1688-320X 2022, 'Validation of the RunScribe Inertial Measurement Unit for walking gait measurement' , PLoS ONE .

[img] Microsoft Word - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only

Download (2MB) | Request a copy
[img]
Preview
PDF - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Download (753kB) | Preview
[img]
Preview
PDF - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Download (743kB) | Preview

Abstract

Intro: The use of portable gait measurement systems in research is appealing to collect real-world data at low-cost, low participant burden, and without requirement for dedicated lab space. Most commercially available inertial measurement units (IMU’s) designed for running only capture temporospatial data, the ability to capture biomechanics data such as shock and motion metrics with the RunScribe IMU makes it the closest to a lab alternative. The RunScribe system has been validated in running, however, is yet to be validated for walking. Method: Qualisys motion capture, AMTI force plates, and Delsys Trigno accelerometers were used as gold standard lab measures for comparison against the RunScribe IMU. Twenty participants completed 10 footsteps per foot (20 total) measured by both systems simultaneously. Variables for validation included: Vertical Ground reaction force (GRF), instantaneous GRF rate, pronation excursion, pronation velocity, total shock, impact force, braking force. Interclass correlation (ICC) was used to determine agreement between the measurement systems, mean differences were used to evaluate group level accuracy. Results: ICC results showed moderate agreement between measurement systems when both limbs were averaged. The greatest agreement was seen for GRF rate, pronation excursion, and pronation velocity (ICC = 0.627, 0.616, 0.539), low agreement was seen for GRF, total shock, impact shock, braking shock (ICC = 0.269, 0.351, 0.244, 0.180). However mean differences show the greatest level of accuracy for GRF, GRF rate, and impact shock. Discussion: Results show mixed agreement between the RunScribe and gold standard lab measures, and varied agreement across left and right limbs. Kinematic variables showed the greatest agreement, however GRF had the lowest relative mean difference for group results. The results show acceptable levels of agreement for most variables, however further work must be done to assess the repeatability and sensitivity of the RunScribe to be applied within areas such as footwear testing and gait retraining protocols.

Item Type: Article
Schools: Schools > School of Health and Society > Centre for Health Sciences Research
Schools > School of Health and Society
Journal or Publication Title: PLoS ONE
Publisher: Public Library of Science
ISSN: 1932-6203
Funders: Innovate UK, Scholl's Wellness company
Depositing User: C Price
Date Deposited: 01 Sep 2022 12:19
Last Modified: 01 Sep 2022 12:30
URI: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/64568

Actions (login required)

Edit record (repository staff only) Edit record (repository staff only)

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year