背景:步态分析对于评估运动功能和跌倒风险至关重要,特别是在老年人和各种肌肉骨骼疾病中。传统的步态分析系统面临技术困难、高成本,和使用的复杂性。因此,需要一种具有更广泛的临床适用性的更容易获得和具有成本效益的系统。
目的:本研究旨在验证新开发的IB-gait®系统(InBody,大韩民国),基于相机的步态分析工具,通过将其与VICON系统进行比较。
方法:本研究共纳入28名没有步态异常的社区居住成年人(平均年龄24.9岁)。参与者同时使用VICON和IB-gait®以他们自己选择的速度进行步态分析。九个时空步态参数,包括步幅(m),步长(m),跨步持续时间(s),双肢持续时间(S),姿态阶段(S),摆动相位,节奏(速度×120/步幅),测量步态速度(m/s)。使用Bland-Altman图和组内相关系数(ICC)测试了两个系统之间的一致性。
结果:IB-gait®在大多数步态参数上与VICON系统表现出高度的一致性。ICC对步幅(0.97)显示出优异的可靠性,步长(0.92),步态速度(0.97),节奏(0.97),和跨步持续时间(0.79)。然而,它在基于时间的参数中显示出较低的可靠性,包括双肢持续时间(0.12),姿态阶段(0.54),摆动相位(0.241),和立场/摆动相位比(0.11)。
结论:IB-gait®系统似乎是用于步态分析的VICON系统的可行且具有成本效益的替代方案,特别是在基于距离的参数中显示出高度的一致性。其在临床环境中的实用性使其成为广泛用于步态分析的有价值的工具。然而,需要进一步完善基于时间的参数测量,并在不同患者人群中进行验证,以增强其适用性.
BACKGROUND: Gait analysis is essential for evaluating locomotor function and fall risk, particularly in the elderly and in various musculoskeletal disorders. Traditional gait analysis systems face challenges such as technical difficulties, high cost, and complexity of use. Therefore, there is a need for a more accessible and cost-effective system with a wider clinical applicability.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate the newly developed IB-gait® system (InBody, Republic of Korea), a camera-based gait analysis tool, by comparing it against the VICON system.
METHODS: A total of 28 community-dwelling adults without gait abnormalities (mean age 24.9 years) were enrolled in this study. The participants underwent gait analysis at their self-selected speed using VICON and IB-gait® simultaneously. Nine spatiotemporal gait parameters, including stride length (m), step length (m), stride duration (s), double-limb duration (s), stance phase (s), swing phase (s), cadence (velocity × 120/stride length), and gait velocity (m/s) were measured. The agreement between the two systems was tested using Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
RESULTS: The IB-gait® showed a high degree of agreement with the VICON system in most gait parameters. The ICC showed excellent reliability for stride length (0.97), step length (0.92), gait velocity (0.97), cadence (0.97), and stride duration (0.79). However, it showed lower reliability in time-based parameters, including double-limb duration (0.12), stance phase (0.54), swing phase (0.241), and stance/swing phase ratio (0.11).
CONCLUSIONS: The IB-gait® system appears to be a feasible and cost-effective alternative to VICON system for gait analysis, particularly showing a high level of agreement in the distance-based parameters. Its practicality in clinical settings makes it a valuable tool for widespread use in gait analysis. However, further refinement of time-based parameter measurements and validation in diverse patient populations are needed to enhance its applicability.