The accuracy of commercially available instrumented insoles (ARION) for measuring spatiotemporal running metrics

Abstract

Spatiotemporal metrics such as step frequency have been associated with running injuries in some studies. Wearables can measure these metrics and provide real‐time feedback in‐field, but are often not validated. This study assessed the validity of commercially available wireless instrumented insoles (ARION) for quantifying spatiotemporal metrics during level running at different speeds (2.78–5.0 m s−1,) and slopes (3° and 6° up/downhill) to an instrumented treadmill. Mean raw, percentage and absolute percentage error, and limits of agreement (LoA) were calculated. Agreement was statistically quantified using four thresholds: excellent, <5%; good, <10%; acceptable, <15%; and poor, >15% error. Excellent agreement (<5% error) was achieved for stride time across all conditions, and for step frequency across all but one condition with good agreement. Contact time and swing time generally showed at least good agreement. The mean difference across all conditions was −0.95% for contact time, 0.11% for stride time, 0.6% for swing time, −0.11% for step frequency, and −0.09% when averaged across all outcomes and conditions. The accuracy at an individual level was generally good to excellent, being <10% for all but two conditions, with these conditions being <15%. Additional experiments among four runners showed that step length could also be measured with an accuracy of 1.76% across different speeds with an updated version of the insoles. These findings suggests that the ARION wearable may not only be useful for large‐scale in‐field studies investigating group differences, but also to quantify spatiotemporal metrics with generally good to excellent accuracy for individual runners.