The increasing number of postural disorders emphasizes the central role of the vertebral spine during gait. Indeed, clinicians need an accurate and non-invasive method to evaluate the effectiveness of a rehabilitation program on spinal kinematics. Accordingly, the aim of this work was the use of inertial sensors for the assessment of angles among vertebral segments during gait. The spine was partitioned into five segments and correspondingly five inertial measurement units were positioned. Articulations between two adjacent spine segments were modeled with spherical joints, and the tilt–twist method was adopted to evaluate flexion–extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. In total, 18 young healthy subjects (9 males and 9 females) walked barefoot in three different conditions. The spinal posture during gait was efficiently evaluated considering the patterns of planar angles of each spine segment. Some statistically significant differences highlighted the influence of gender, speed and imposed cadence. The proposed methodology proved the usability of inertial sensors for the assessment of spinal posture and it is expected to efficiently point out trunk compensatory pattern during gait in a clinical context.
PerryJ.Gait analysis: normal and pathological function. Thorofare, NJ: Slack Incorporated, 1992.
2.
LoughenburyPRTsirikosAGummersonNW.Spinal biomechanics-biomechanical considerations of spinal stability in the context of spinal injury. Orthop Trauma2016; 30: 369–377.
3.
SyczewskaMBÖbergTKarlssonD.Segmental movements of the spine during treadmill walking with normal speed. Clin Biomech1999; 14: 384–388.
4.
BenatruIVaugoyeauMAzulayJ.Postural disorders in Parkinson’s disease. Clin Neurophysiol2008; 38: 459–465.
5.
LamothCJCMeijerOGDaffertshoferA, et al. Effects of chronic low back pain on trunk coordination and back muscle activity during walking: changes in motor control. Eur Spine J2006; 15: 23–40.
6.
CooperRCardanCAllenR.Computer visualisation of the moving human lumbar spine. Comput Biol Med2001; 31: 451–469.
7.
GastaldiLLiscoGPastorelliS.Evaluation of functional methods for human movement modelling. Acta Bioeng Biomech2015; 17: 31–38.
8.
BlajerWDziewieckiKMazurZ.Multibody modeling of human body for the inverse dynamics analysis of sagittal plane movements. Multibody Syst Dyn2007; 18: 217–232.
9.
CafollaDCeccarelliM.Design and simulation of humanoid Spine. Mech Mach Sci2015; 24: 585–593.
10.
CeccatoJCde SèzeMAzevedoC, et al. Comparison of trunk activity during gait initiation and walking in humans. PLoS ONE2009; 4: e8193.
11.
FrigoCCarabalonaRDalla MuraM, et al. The upper body segmental movements during walking by young females. Clin Biomech2003; 18: 419–425.
12.
CrosbieJVachalathitiRSmithR.Patterns of spinal motion during walking. Gait Posture1997; 5: 6–12.
13.
NeedhamRNaemiRHealyA, et al. Multi-segment kinematic model to assess three-dimensional movement of the spine and back during gait. Prosthet Orthot Int2015; 40: 624–635.
14.
LeardiniABiagiFMerloA, et al. Multi-segment trunk kinematics during locomotion and elementary exercises. Clin Biomech2011; 26: 562–571.
15.
GoodvinCParkEJHuangK, et al. Development of a real-time three-dimensional spinal motion measurement system for clinical practice. Med Biol Eng Comput2006; 44: 1061–1075.
16.
SpragerSJuricMB.Inertial sensor-based gait recognition: a review. Sensors (Basel)2015; 15: 22089–22127.
17.
BuganéFBenedettiMGCasadioG, et al. Estimation of spatial-temporal gait parameters in level walking based on a single accelerometer: validation on normal subjects by standard gait analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed2012; 108: 129–137.
18.
KöseACereattiADella CroceU.Bilateral step length estimation using a single inertial measurement unit attached to the pelvis. J Neuroeng Rehabil2012; 9: 9.
19.
TrojanielloDCereattiAPelosinE, et al. Estimation of step-by-step spatio-temporal parameters of normal and impaired gait using shank-mounted magneto-inertial sensors: application to elderly, hemiparetic, parkinsonian and choreic gait. J Neuroeng Rehabil2014; 11: 1–12.
20.
KlugeFGaßnerHHanninkJ, et al. Towards mobile gait analysis: concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of an inertial measurement system for the assessment of spatio-temporal gait parameters. Sensors (Switzerland)2017; 17: 1522.
21.
AgostiniVGastaldiLRossoV, et al. A wearable magneto-inertial system for gait analysis (H-gait): validation on normal weight and overweight/obese young healthy adults. Sensors (Switzerland)2017; 17: 2406.
22.
AlqhtaniRSJonesMDTheobaldPS, et al. Reliability of an accelerometer-based system for quantifying multiregional spinal range of motion. J Manipulative Physiol Ther2015; 38: 275–281.
23.
ChhikaraAMcGregorAHHadjilucasL, et al. Quantitative assessment of the motion of the lumbar spine and pelvis with wearable inertial sensors. In: 2010 international conference on body sensor networks, BSN 2010, Singapore, 7–9 June 2010, pp.9–15. New York: IEEE.
24.
CafollaDChenIMCeccarelliM.An experimental characterization of human torso motion. Front Mech Eng2015; 10: 311–325.
25.
BauerCMRastFMErnstMJ, et al. Concurrent validity and reliability of a novel wireless inertial measurement system to assess trunk movement. J Electromyogr Kinesiol2015; 25: 782–790.
26.
HajibozorgiMArjmandN.Sagittal range of motion of the thoracic spine using inertial tracking device and effect of measurement errors on model predictions. J Biomech2016; 49: 913–918.
27.
BolinkSAANNaisasHSendenR, et al. Validity of an inertial measurement unit to assess pelvic orientation angles during gait, sit-stand transfers and step-up transfers: comparison with an optoelectronic motion capture system. Med Eng Phys2016; 38: 225–231.
SchallMCFethkeNBChenH, et al. A comparison of instrumentation methods to estimate thoracolumbar motion in field-based occupational studies. Appl Ergon2015; 48: 224–231.
30.
AlqhtaniRSJonesMDTheobaldPS, et al. Investigating the contribution of the upper and lower lumbar spine, relative to hip motion, in everyday tasks. Man Ther2016; 21: 268–273.
31.
BuganèFBenedettiMGD’AngeliV, et al. Estimation of pelvis kinematics in level walking based on a single inertial sensor positioned close to the sacrum: validation on healthy subjects with stereophotogrammetric system. Biomed Eng Online2014; 13: 1–15.
32.
DigoEPierroGPastorelliS, et al. Tilt-twist method using inertial sensors to assess spinal posture during gait. In: International conference on robotics in Alpe-Adria Danube Region, Kaiserslautern, 19–21 June, pp.384–392. Cham: Springer.
33.
CrawfordNRYamaguchiGTDickmanCA.A new technique for determining 3-D joint angles: the tilt/twist method. Clin Biomech1999; 14: 153–165.
34.
BonevIZlatanovDGosselinC. Advantages of the modified Euler angles in the design and control of PKMs. In: Proceeding parallel kinematic machines international conference, Chemnitz, 23–25 April 2002, pp.171–188. Verlag Wissenschaftliche Scripten.
35.
ObergTKarszniaAObergK.Basic gait parameters: reference data for normal subjects, 10-79 years of age. J Rehabil Res Dev1993; 30: 210–223.
36.
PaneroEDigoEAgostiniV, et al. Comparison of different motion capture setups for gait analysis: validation of spatio-temporal parameters estimation. In: Memea 2018 – 2018 IEEE international symposium on medical measurements and applications, proceedings, Rome, 11–13 June 2018, pp.1–6. New York: IEEE.
37.
CrosbieJVachalathitiRSmithR.Age, gender and speed effects on spinal kinematics during walking. Gait Posture1997; 5: 13–20.
38.
HoleDECookJMBoltonJE.Reliability and concurrent validity of two instruments for measuring cervical range of motion: effects of age and gender. Man Ther1995; 1: 36–42.
39.
SmithKHallTRobinsonK.The influence of age, gender, lifestyle factors and sub-clinical neck pain on the cervical flexion—rotation test and cervical range of motion. Man Ther2008; 13: 552–559.
40.
SmithLKLelasJLKerriganDC.Gender differences in pelvic motions and center of mass displacement during walking: stereotypes quantified. J Womens Health Gend Based Med2002; 11: 453–458.
