The validity of spatiotemporal gait analysis using dual laser range sensors: a cross-sectional study

Background: The spatiotemporal parameters were used for sophisticated gait analysis in widespread clinical use. Recently, a laser range sensor has been proposed as a new device for the spatiotemporal gait measurement. However, measurement using a single laser range sensor can only be used for short-range gait measurements because the device irradiates participants with lasers in a radial manner. For long-range gait measurement, the present study uses a modified method using dual laser range sensors installed at opposite ends of the walking path. The aim of present study was to investigate the concurrent validity of the proposed method for spatiotemporal gait measurement by comparison to a computer-based instrumented walkway system. Methods: Ten healthy participants were enrolled in this study. Ten-meter walking tests at 100, 75, and 50% of the comfortable speed were conducted to determine the concurrent validity of the proposed method compared to instrumented walkway measurements. Frequency distributions of errors for foot-contact (FC) and foot-off (FO) estimated times between the two systems were also calculated to determine the adequacy of estimation of FC and FO from three perspectives: accuracy (smallness of mean error), precision (smallness of variability), and unambiguity (monomodality of histogram). Intra-class correlation coefficient (2,1) was used to determine the concurrent validity of spatiotemporal parameters between the two systems. Result: The results indicate that the detection times for FC and FO estimated by the proposed method did not differ from those measured by the instrumented walkway reference system. In addition, histogram for FC and FO showed monomodality. Intra-class correlation coefficients of the spatiotemporal parameters (stance time: 0.74; double support time: 0.56; stride time: 0.89; stride length: 0.83; step length: 0.71; swing time: 0.23) were not high enough. The mean errors of all spatiotemporal parameters were small. Conclusions: These results suggest that the proposed lacks sufficient concurrent validity for spatiotemporal gait measurement. Further improvement of this proposed system seems necessary. Trial registration: UMIN000032710. Registered 24 May 2018. Retrospectively registered.