Authors
»
Kluge F, Brand YE, Micó-Amigo ME, Bertuletti S, D'Ascanio I, Gazit E, Bonci T, Kirk C, Küderle A, Palmerini L, Paraschiv-Ionescu A, Salis F, Soltani A, Ullrich M, Alcock L, Aminian K, Becker C, Brown P, Buekers J, Carsin AE, Caruso M, Caulfield B, Cereatti A, Chiari L, Echevarria C, Eskofier B, Evers J, Garcia-Aymerich J, Hache T, Hansen C, Hausdorff JM, Hiden H, Hume E, Keogh A, Koch S, Maetzler W, Megaritis D, Niessen M, Perlman O, Schwickert L, Scott K, Sharrack B, Singleton D, Vereijken B, Vogiatzis I, Yarnall A, Rochester L, Mazzà C, Del Din S, Mueller A -More
Category
»
Primary study
Journal»JMIR formative research
Year
»
2024
BACKGROUND: Wrist-worn inertial sensors are used in digital health for evaluating
mobility in real-world environments. Preceding the estimation of spatiotemporal
gait parameters within long-term recordings, gait detection is an important step
to identify regions of interest where gait occurs, which requires robust
algorithms due to the complexity of arm movements. While algorithms exist for
other sensor positions, a comparative validation of algorithms applied to the
wrist position on real-world data sets across different disease populations is
missing. Furthermore, gait detection performance differences between the wrist
and lower back position have not yet been explored but could yield valuable
information regarding sensor position choice in clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: The
aim of this study was to validate gait sequence (GS) detection algorithms
developed for the wrist position against reference data acquired in a real-world
context. In addition, this study aimed to compare the performance of algorithms
applied to the wrist position to those applied to lower back-worn inertial
sensors. METHODS: Participants with Parkinson disease, multiple sclerosis,
proximal femoral fracture (hip fracture recovery), chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease, and congestive heart failure and healthy older adults (N=83) were
monitored for 2.5 hours in the real-world using inertial sensors on the wrist,
lower back, and feet including pressure insoles and infrared distance sensors as
reference. In total, 10 algorithms for wrist-based gait detection were validated
against a multisensor reference system and compared to gait detection performance
using lower back-worn inertial sensors. RESULTS: The best-performing GS detection
algorithm for the wrist showed a mean (per disease group) sensitivity ranging
between 0.55 (SD 0.29) and 0.81 (SD 0.09) and a mean (per disease group)
specificity ranging between 0.95 (SD 0.06) and 0.98 (SD 0.02). The mean relative
absolute error of estimated walking time ranged between 8.9% (SD 7.1%) and 32.7%
(SD 19.2%) per disease group for this algorithm as compared to the reference
system. Gait detection performance from the best algorithm applied to the wrist
inertial sensors was lower than for the best algorithms applied to the lower
back, which yielded mean sensitivity between 0.71 (SD 0.12) and 0.91 (SD 0.04),
mean specificity between 0.96 (SD 0.03) and 0.99 (SD 0.01), and a mean relative
absolute error of estimated walking time between 6.3% (SD 5.4%) and 23.5% (SD
13%). Performance was lower in disease groups with major gait impairments (eg,
patients recovering from hip fracture) and for patients using bilateral walking
aids. CONCLUSIONS: Algorithms applied to the wrist position can detect GSs with
high performance in real-world environments. Those periods of interest in
real-world recordings can facilitate gait parameter extraction and allow the
quantification of gait duration distribution in everyday life. Our findings allow
taking informed decisions on alternative positions for gait recording in clinical
studies and public health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry 12246987;
https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12246987. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER
(IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050785.
Epistemonikos ID: 2864ac81517943e912082b90091e1717cdfd33f9
First added on: Mar 06, 2026