Search

Clinical tests like Timed Up and Go (TUG) facilitate the assessment of post-stroke mobility, but they lack detailed measures. In this study, 21 stroke survivors and 20 control participants underwent TUG, sit-to-stand (STS), and the 10 Meter Walk Test (10MWT). Tests incorporated single tasks (STs) and motor-cognitive dual-task (DTs) involving reverse counting from 200 in decrements of 10. Eight wearable motion sensors were placed on feet, shanks, thighs, sacrum, and sternum to record kinematic data. These data were analyzed to investigate the effects of stroke and DT conditions on the extracted features across segmented portions of the tests. The findings showed that stroke survivors (SS) took 23% longer for total TUG (p < 0.001), with 31% longer turn time (p = 0.035). TUG time increased by 20% (p < 0.001) from STs to DTs. In DTs, turning time increased by 31% (p = 0.005). Specifically, SS showed 20% lower trunk angular velocity in sit-to-stand (p = 0.003), 21% longer 10-Meter Walk time (p = 0.010), and 18% slower gait speed (p = 0.012). As expected, turning was especially challenging and worsened with divided attention. The outcomes of our study demonstrate the benefits of instrumented clinical tests and DTs in effectively identifying motor deficits post-stroke across sitting, standing, walking, and turning activities, thereby indicating that quantitative motion analysis can optimize rehabilitation procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Falls are common and dangerous for stroke survivors. Current fall risk assessment methods rely on subjective scales. Objective sensor-based methods could improve prediction accuracy. Objective: Develop machine learning models using inertial sensors to objectively classify fall risk in stroke survivors. Determine optimal sensor configurations and clinical test protocols. Methods: 21 stroke survivors performed balance, Timed Up and Go, 10 Meter Walk, and Sit-to-Stand tests with and without dual-tasking. A total of 8 motion sensors captured lower limb and trunk kinematics, and 92 spatiotemporal gait and clinical features were extracted. Supervised models—Support Vector Machine, Logistic Regression, and Random Forest—were implemented to classify high vs. low fall risk. Sensor setups and test combinations were evaluated. Results: The Random Forest model achieved 91% accuracy using dual-task balance sway and Timed Up and Go walk time features. Single thorax sensor models performed similarly to multi-sensor models. Balance and Timed Up and Go best-predicted fall risk. Conclusion: Machine learning models using minimal inertial sensors during clinical assessments can accurately quantify fall risk in stroke survivors. Single thorax sensor setups are effective. Findings demonstrate a feasible objective fall screening approach to assist rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A stroke often bequeaths surviving patients with impaired neuromusculoskeletal systems subjecting them to increased risk of injury (e.g., due to falls) even during activities of daily living. The risk of injuries to such individuals can be related to alterations in their movement. Using inertial sensors to record the digital biomarkers during turning could reveal the relevant turning alterations. Objectives: In this study, movement alterations in stroke survivors (SS) were studied and compared to healthy individuals (HI) in the entire turning task due to its requirement of synergistic application of multiple bodily systems. Methods: The motion of 28 participants (14 SS, 14 HI) during turning was captured using a set of four Inertial Measurement Units, placed on their sternum, sacrum, and both shanks. The motion signals were segmented using the temporal and spatial segmentation of the data from the leading and trailing shanks. Several kinematic parameters, including the range of motion and angular velocity of the four body segments, turning time, the number of cycles involved in the turning task, and portion of the stance phase while turning, were extracted for each participant. Results: The results of temporal processing of the data and comparison between the SS and HI showed that SS had more cycles involved in turning, turn duration, stance phase, range of motion in flexion–extension, and lateral bending for sternum and sacrum (p-value < 0.035). However, HI exhibited larger angular velocity in flexion–extension for all four segments. The results of the spatial processing, in agreement with the prior method, showed no difference between the range of motion in flexion–extension of both shanks (p-value > 0.08). However, it revealed that the angular velocity of the shanks of leading and trailing legs in the direction of turn was more extensive in the HI (p-value < 0.01). Conclusions: The changes in upper/lower body segments of SS could be adequately identified and quantified by IMU sensors. The identified kinematic changes in SS, such as the lower flexion–extension angular velocity of the four body segments and larger lateral bending range of motion in sternum and sacrum compared to HI in turning, could be due to the lack of proper core stability and effect of turning on vestibular system of the participants. This research could facilitate the development of a targeted and efficient rehabilitation program focusing on the affected aspects of turning movement for the stroke community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]