Agreement between the spatiotemporal gait parameters from two different wearable devices and high-speed video analysis

Felipe García-Pinillos; Pedro Á Latorre-Román; Víctor M Soto-Hermoso; Juan A Párraga-Montilla; Antonio Pantoja-Vallejo; Rodrigo Ramírez-Campillo; Luis E Roche-Seruendo

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0222872

Agreement between the spatiotemporal gait parameters from two different wearable devices and high-speed video analysis

PLoS One. 2019 Sep 24;14(9):e0222872. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222872. eCollection 2019.

Authors

Felipe García-Pinillos¹, Pedro Á Latorre-Román², Víctor M Soto-Hermoso³, Juan A Párraga-Montilla², Antonio Pantoja-Vallejo⁴, Rodrigo Ramírez-Campillo⁵, Luis E Roche-Seruendo⁶

Affiliations

¹ Department of Physical Education, Sports and Recreation, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile.
² Department of Corporal Expression, University of Jaen, Jaen, Spain.
³ Sport and Health University Research Center (iMUDS), University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
⁴ Department of Pedagogy, University of Jaen, Jaen, Spain.
⁵ Laboratory of Human Performance, Quality of Life and Wellness Research Group, Department of Physical Activity Sciences, Universidad de Los Lagos, Osorno, Chile.
⁶ Universidad San Jorge, Villanueva de Gallego, Zaragoza, Spain.

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the concurrent validity of two different inertial measurement units for measuring spatiotemporal parameters during running on a treadmill, by comparing data with a high-speed video analysis (VA) at 1,000 Hz. Forty-nine endurance runners performed a running protocol on a treadmill at comfortable velocity (i.e., 3.25 ± 0.36 m.s-1). Those wearable devices (i.e., Stryd™ and RunScribe™ systems) were compared to a high-speed VA, as a reference system for measuring spatiotemporal parameters (i.e. contact time [CT], flight time [FT], step frequency [SF] and step length [SL]) during running at comfortable velocity. The pairwise comparison revealed that the Stryd™ system underestimated CT (5.2%, p < 0.001) and overestimated FT (15.1%, p < 0.001) compared to the VA; whereas the RunScribe™ system underestimated CT (2.3%, p = 0.009). No significant differences were observed in SF and SL between the wearable devices and VA. The intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) revealed an almost perfect association between both systems and high-speed VA (ICC > 0.81). The Bland-Altman plots revealed heteroscedasticity of error (r2 = 0.166) for the CT from the Stryd™ system, whereas no heteroscedasticity of error (r2 < 0.1) was revealed in the rest of parameters. In conclusion, the results obtained suggest that both foot pods are valid tools for measuring spatiotemporal parameters during running on a treadmill at comfortable velocity. If the limits of agreement of both systems are considered in respect to high-speed VA, the RunScribe™ seems to be a more accurate system for measuring temporal parameters and SL than the Stryd™ system.

Publication types

Comparative Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study

MeSH terms

Adult
Exercise Test / instrumentation*
Female
Gait / physiology*
Humans
Male
Running / physiology*
Spatio-Temporal Analysis*
Video Recording
Wearable Electronic Devices*
Young Adult

Grants and funding

This study was funded by the University of La Frontera (Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile, Project DI19-0023). This grant was awarded to FGP. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.