Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences & Research

Can a Smartphone be used for Balance Assessment during Walking in Lower Limb Amputees?

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

Mohammad Reza Rezaie 1
Tahmoures Tahmasebi 1
Akbar Hassanzadeh 2

1 Department of Orthotics and Prosthetics, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.30476/jrsr.2020.84956.1073
Abstract
Background:Nowadays, smartphones are equipped with an accelerometer module that can measure and record the body linear accelerations during walking. The aims of this study were: 1) reliability assessment of smartphone accelerometer for trunk accelerometry; 2) comparison of stability indices base on trunk accelerometry between the amputee and able-bodied subjects; and 3) comparison between energy storage and release (ESR) and multi-axis prosthetic feet users.
Methods: Eleven below-knee amputees (5 multi-axis and 6 ESR prosthetic feet) and 11 able-bodied subjects enrolled in this comparative study. The dynamic stability was assessed using a smartphone attached to their back through an elastic belt during walking in a 6-m walkway. Also, normalized root mean squares (nRMS) of mediolateral (ML) and anteroposterior (AP) directions were calculated as stability indices. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), SEM%, and Bland-Altman plots were used for reliability analysis. The Independent T-test was also used to compare the healthy and amputee subjects as well as ESR and multiaxis prosthetic feet users. The critical alpha was set at 0.05.
Results: The results showed that the accelerometer has the ICC values more than 0.97 and 0.89 for test-retest and inter-session, respectively. Amputees had significantly higher trunk accelerations in ML direction compared to able-bodied subjects (p=0.023) but not in AP direction (p=0.496). Although the results were not significant between ESR and multi-axis prosthetic feet (AP P= 0.16, ML P=0.44), the AP stability index was higher in ESR users (AP Multi-axis=117.45, ESR=127.38).
Conclusion: The smartphone can be used as a reliable measurement tool in clinical environments to assess the stability indices based on trunk accelerometry in transtibial amputees. More studies should be conducted to obtain more reliable results.

Keywords

Amputees
Stability
Smartphone
Accelerometry
Reliability analysis
  1. Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, Travison TG,
    Brookmeyer R. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United
    States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(3):422-9.
    2. Ülger Ö, Topuz S, Bayramlar K, Erbahçeci F, Sener G. Risk
    factors, frequency, and causes of falling in geriatric persons
    who has had a limb removed by amputation. Topics in Geriatric
    Rehabilitation. 2010;26(2):156-63.
    3. Ku PX, Abu Osman NA, Wan Abas WA. Balance control in lower
    extremity amputees during quiet standing: a systematic review.
    Gait Posture. 2014;39(2):672-82.
    4. Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement:
    John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
    5. Arifin N, Abu Osman NA, Ali S, Gholizadeh H, Wan Abas WA.
    Evaluation of postural steadiness in below-knee amputees when
    wearing different prosthetic feet during various sensory conditions
    using the Biodex® Stability System. Proc Inst Mech Eng H.
    2015;229(7):491-8.
    6. Hansen A, Nickel E, Medvec J, Brielmaier S, Pike A, Weber M.
    Effects of a flat prosthetic foot rocker section on balance and
    mobility. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(1):137-48.
    7. Arifin N, Abu Osman NA, Ali S, Gholizadeh H, Abas WA. Postural
    stability characteristics of transtibial amputees wearing different
    prosthetic foot types when standing on various support surfaces.
    World Journal TS. 2014;:856279.
    8. Miller WC, Speechley M, Deathe B. The prevalence and risk
    factors of falling and fear of falling among lower extremity
    amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82(8):1031-7.
    9. Panzenbeck JT, Klute GK. A powered inverting and everting
    prosthetic foot for balance assistance in lower limb amputees.
    JPO: Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics. 2012;24(4):175-80.
    10. Kosse NM, Caljouw S, Vervoort D, Vuillerme N, Lamoth CJ.
    Validity and Reliability of Gait and Postural Control Analysis
    Using the Tri-axial Accelerometer of the iPod Touch. Ann Biomed
    Eng. 2015;43(8):1935-46.
    11. Major MJ, Fatone S, Roth EJ. Validity and reliability of the Berg
    Balance Scale for community-dwelling persons with lower-limb
    amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(11):2194-202.
    12. Paradisi F, Di Stanislao E, Summa A, Brunelli S, Traballesi M,
    Vannozzi G. Upper body accelerations during level walking in
    transtibial amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2019;43(2):204-212.
    13. Moe-Nilssen R. Test-retest reliability of trunk accelerometry
    during standing and walking. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.
    1998;79(11):1377-85.
    14. Paradisi F, Delussu AS, Brunelli S, Iosa M, Pellegrini R, Zenardi
    D, Traballesi M. The Conventional Non-Articulated SACH or a
    Multiaxial Prosthetic Foot for Hypomobile Transtibial Amputees?
    A Clinical Comparison on Mobility, Balance, and Quality of Life.
    World Journal TS. 2015;261801.
    15. Zijlstra W, Hof AL. Assessment of spatio-temporal gait parameters
    from trunk accelerations during human walking. Gait Posture.
    2003;18(2):1-10.
    16. Iosa M, Paradisi F, Brunelli S, Delussu AS, Pellegrini R, Zenardi
    D, Paolucci S, Traballesi M. Assessment of gait stability, harmony,
    and symmetry in subjects with lower-limb amputation evaluated
    by trunk accelerations. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(4):623-34.
    17. Fleiss JL. Design and analysis of clinical experiments: John
    Wiley & Sons; 2011.
    18. Dudek FJ. The continuing misinterpretation of the standard error
    of measurement. Psychological Bulletin. 1979;86(2):335.
    19. Procházka A, Vyšata O, Charvátová H, Vališ M. Motion Symmetry
    Evaluation Using Accelerometers and Energy Distribution.
    Symmetry. 2019;11(7):871.
    20. Lamoth CJ, Ainsworth E, Polomski W, Houdijk H. Variability
    and stability analysis of walking of transfemoral amputees. Med Eng Phys. 2010;32(9):1009-14.
    21. Lusardi MM, Jorge M, Nielsen CC. Orthotics and Prosthetics in
    Rehabilitation E-Book: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013.
    22. Lenka P, Tiberwala DN. Effect of stump length on postural
    steadiness during quiet stance in unilateral trans-tibial amputee.
    Al Ameen J of Med Sci. 2010;3(1):50-7.
    23. Quai TM, Brauer SG, Nitz JC. Somatosensation, circulation and
    stance balance in elderly dysvascular transtibial amputees. Clin
    Rehabil. 2005;19(6):668-76.
    24. Seth M, Lamberg E. Standing balance in people with trans-tibial
    amputation due to vascular causes: A literature review. Prosthet
    Orthot Int. 2017;41(4):345-355.
    25. Kamali M, Karimi MT, Eshraghi A, Omar H. Influential factors
    in stability of lower-limb amputees. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.
    2013;92(12):1110-8.
    26. D’Andrea S, Wilhelm N, Silverman AK, Grabowski AM. Does
    use of a powered ankle-foot prosthesis restore whole-body angular
    momentum during walking at different speeds? Clin Orthop Relat
    Res. 2014;472(10):3044-54.
    27. Micó-Amigo ME, Kingma I, Faber GS, Kunikoshi A, van
    Uem JMT, van Lummel RC, Maetzler W, van Dieën JH. Is the
    Assessment of 5 Meters of Gait with a Single Body-Fixed-Sensor
    Enough to Recognize Idiopathic Parkinson’s Disease-Associated
    Gait? Ann Biomed Eng. 2017;45(5):1266-1278.
    28. Howcroft J, Lemaire ED, Kofman J, Kendell C. Understanding
    dynamic stability from pelvis accelerometer data and the
    relationship to balance and mobility in transtibial amputees.
    Gait Posture. 2015;41(3):808-12.
Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences & Research
Volume 7, Issue 2
June 2020
Pages 47-53

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Guide for Reviewers

Contact Us