Programa del congreso
Resúmenes y datos de las sesiones para este congreso. Seleccione una fecha o ubicación para mostrar solo las sesiones en ese día o ubicación. Seleccione una sola sesión para obtener una vista detallada (con resúmenes y descargas, si están disponibles).
|
Resumen diario |
| Sesión | |
|
Ju-S4.5-DispIn: Dispositivos e instrumentación biomédica Lugar: Aula 1.07 Presidente de la sesión: Javier García Casado Presidente de la sesión: José Miguel Burdío Pinilla | |
    | |
8:45 - 9:00
Validation of an IMU-based system against an optoelectronic system for spatial gait parameters in treadmill walking 1: BioRobotics Group, Centre for Automation and Robotics (CAR) – Spanish National Research Council, Ctra. M-300 Campo Real km 0,200, 28500, Arganda del Rey (Madrid), Spain; 2: Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain; 3: Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA By quantifying subtle changes in a person’s walking pattern, gait analysis provides objective biometrics to help diagnose and monitor a wide range of neurological and musculoskeletal conditions. While optoelectronic systems like Vicon are considered the gold standard for motion capture, wearable systems such as Xsens offer a portable and low-cost alternative. However, direct comparison between systems is not commonly performed. This study analyzed the intra- and inter-system reliability of both Xsens and Vicon for computing two spatial gait metrics: step length and step width. Gait data were obtained from 10 subjects walking on a treadmill instrumented with both systems. Step length and width were computed and compared using the intra-class correlation coefficient, linear mixed models, and the mean absolute error. Within-system reliability was excellent for both systems. Between systems, step length showed excellent agreement despite a consistent systematic bias; whereas step width showed poor agreement, reflecting a larger random error component. Our findings confirm that although both systems are highly consistent with themselves, the reliability between them is metric-dependent. Xsens is a valid alternative for measuring step length, but not for step width. These findings underscore the necessity of performing metric-specific validations.
| |