Validity Analysis of WalkerViewTM Instrumented Treadmill for Measuring Spatiotemporal and Kinematic Gait Parameters

Abstract

The detection of gait abnormalities is essential for professionals involved in the rehabilitation of walking disorders. Instrumented treadmills are spreading as an alternative to overground gait analysis. To date, the use of these instruments for recording kinematic gait parameters is still limited in clinical practice due to the lack of validation studies. This study aims to investigate the performance of a multi-sensor instrumented treadmill (i.e., WalkerViewTM, WV) for performing gait analysis. Seventeen participants performed a single gait test on the WV at three different speeds (i.e., 3 km/h, 5 km/h, and 6.6 km/h). In each trial, spatiotemporal and kinematic parameters were recorded simultaneously by the WV and by a motion capture system used as the reference. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of spatiotemporal parameters showed fair to excellent agreement at the three walking speeds for steps time, cadence, and step length (range 0.502–0.996); weaker levels of agreement were found for stance and swing time at all the tested walking speeds. Bland–Altman analysis of spatiotemporal parameters showed a mean of difference (MOD) maximum value of 0.04 s for swing/stance time and WV underestimation of 2.16 cm for step length. As for kinematic variables, ICC showed fair to excellent agreement (ICC > 0.5) for total range of motion (ROM) of hip at 3 km/h (range 0.579–0.735); weaker levels of ICC were found at 5 km/h and 6.6 km/h (range 0.219–0.447). ICC values of total knee ROM showed poor levels of agreement at all the tested walking speeds. Bland–Altman analysis of hip ROM revealed a higher MOD value at higher speeds up to 3.91°; the MOD values of the knee ROM were always higher than 7.67° with a 60° mean value of ROM. We demonstrated that the WV is a valid tool for analyzing the spatiotemporal parameters of walking and assessing the hip’s total ROM. Knee total ROM and all kinematic peak values should be carefully evaluated, having shown lower levels of agreement.