Validation of gait event detection by centre of pressure during target stepping in healthy and paretic gait

Van der veen, S, Hammerbeck, U, Baker, RJ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4759-4216 and Hollands, KL ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3691-9532 2018, 'Validation of gait event detection by centre of pressure during target stepping in healthy and paretic gait' , Journal of Biomechanics, 79 , pp. 218-222.

Preview	PDF - Accepted Version Download (898kB) | Preview
	Microsoft Word - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (74kB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Background: Target-stepping paradigms are increasingly used to assess and train gait adaptability. Accurate gait-event detection (GED) is key to locating targets relative to the ongoing step cycle as well as measuring foot-placement error. In the current literature GED is either based on kinematics or centre of pressure (CoP), and both have been previously validated with young healthy individuals. However, CoP based GED has not been validated for stroke survivors who demonstrate altered CoP pattern.
Methods: Young healthy adults and individuals affected by stroke stepped to targets on a treadmill, while gait events were measured using three detection methods; verticies of CoP cyclograms, and two kinematic criteria, 1) vertical velocity and position and of the heel marker, 2) anterior velocity and position of the heel and toe marker, were used. The percentage of unmatched gait events was used to determine the success of the GED method. The difference between CoP and kinematic GED methods were tested with two one sample (two-tailed) t-tests against a reference value of zero. Differences between group and paretic and non-paretic leg were tested with a repeated measures ANOVA.
Results: The kinematic method based on vertical velocity only detected about 80% of foot contact events on the paretic side in stroke survivors while the method on anterior velocity was more successful in both young healthy adults as stroke survivors (3% young healthy and 7% stroke survivors unmatched). Both kinematic methods detected gait events significantly earlier than CoP GED (p<0.001) except for foot contact in stroke survivors based on the vertical velocity.
Conclusions: CoP GED may be more appropriate for gait analyses of SS than kinematic methods; even when walking and varying steps.

Item Type:	Article
Schools:	Schools > School of Health and Society > Centre for Health Sciences Research
Journal or Publication Title:	Journal of Biomechanics
Publisher:	Elsevier
ISSN:	0021-9290
Related URLs:	Publisher
Depositing User:	K Hollands
Date Deposited:	03 Aug 2018 10:29
Last Modified:	15 Feb 2022 23:35
URI:	https://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/47970

Actions (login required)

Edit record (repository staff only)