Auto detection and segmentation of physical activities during a Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) task in healthy older adults using multiple inertial sensors

This would be so f*cking easy for our stroke associations to duplicate for stroke survivors. No thinking involved. It would provide vast amounts of information to figure out how to help us walk better.  But it won't occur.
http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/12/1/36/abstract

Hung P Nguyen¹, Fouaz Ayachi¹, Catherine Lavigne–Pelletier¹, Margaux Blamoutier², Fariborz Rahimi³, Patrick Boissy⁴, Mandar Jog⁵ and Christian Duval^1*

• * Corresponding author: Christian Duval duval.christian@uqam.ca

Author Affiliations

For all author emails, please log on.

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 2015, 12:36  doi:10.1186/s12984-015-0026-4
Published: 11 April 2015

Abstract (provisional)

Background Recently, much attention has been given to the use of inertial sensors for remote monitoring of individuals with limited mobility. However, the focus has been mostly on the detection of symptoms, not specific activities. The objective of the present study was to develop an automated recognition and segmentation algorithm based on inertial sensor data to identify common gross motor patterns during activity of daily living. 

Method A modified Time-Up-And-Go (TUG) task was used since it is comprised of four common daily living activities; Standing, Walking, Turning, and Sitting, all performed in a continuous fashion resulting in six different segments during the task. Sixteen healthy older adults performed two trials of a 5 and 10 meter TUG task. They were outfitted with 17 inertial motion sensors covering each body segment. Data from the 10 meter TUG were used to identify pertinent sensors on the trunk, head, hip, knee, and thigh that provided suitable data for detecting and segmenting activities associated with the TUG. Raw data from sensors were detrended to remove sensor drift, normalized, and band pass filtered with optimal frequencies to reveal kinematic peaks that corresponded to different activities. Segmentation was accomplished by identifying the time stamps of the first minimum or maximum to the right and the left of these peaks. Segmentation time stamps were compared to results from two examiners visually segmenting the activities of the TUG.  

Results We were able to detect these activities in a TUG with 100% sensitivity and specificity (n = 192) during the 10 meter TUG. The rate of success was subsequently confirmed in the 5 meter TUG (n = 192) without altering the parameters of the algorithm. When applying the segmentation algorithms to the 10 meter TUG, we were able to parse 100% of the transition points (n = 224) between different segments that were as reliable and less variable than visual segmentation performed by two independent examiners. 

Conclusions The present study lays the foundation for the development of a comprehensive algorithm to detect and segment naturalistic activities using inertial sensors, in hope of evaluating automatically motor performance within the detected tasks.

The complete article is available as a provisional PDF. The fully formatted PDF and HTML versions are in production.