MotionLab@Home: Complementary Measurement of Gait Characteristics Using Wearable Technology and Markerless Video Tracking - A Study Protocol


Article Preview

Background: While treatment monitoring of healthcare interventions is mainly conducted at the hospital, most information on a patient’s health status could be obtained from his everyday life activities. Therefore, there is a great interest in methods for long term (home) monitoring applications. However, there is still a lack of quantitative methods allowing everyday life activities monitoring such as gait analysis at home. While video-based systems have been employed given their high accuracy, they remain expensive and obtrusive with the range of motion of a patient limited to the set up measurement volume. Body worn sensors on the other hand present as an excellent opportunity to remotely and unobtrusively monitor gait characteristics not only at home, but during activities of everyday life. Technical limitations as well as changes in the patient’s gait patterns challenge the extraction of specific gait parameters. Methods: We propose a hybrid system comprising of a markerless video-based motion capturing system and a wearable sensor system with foot worn sensors. A study protocol is presented that will be used to validate the systems against each other. Discussion: This study will evaluate whether a markerless motion capturing system is feasible as a complementary tool for everyday gait analysis. Further, we will validate the accuracy of the sensor system using the video-based system as a gold standard. In the future, the combination might allow a recalibration of algorithmic sensor parameters based on deviations from the reference video-based system, and the combination of both modalities may enhance gait analysis in home monitoring.



Edited by:

Jörg Franke and Markus Michl




F. Kluge et al., "MotionLab@Home: Complementary Measurement of Gait Characteristics Using Wearable Technology and Markerless Video Tracking - A Study Protocol", Advanced Engineering Forum, Vol. 19, pp. 149-155, 2016

Online since:

October 2016




* - Corresponding Author

[1] J. Jankovic, Parkinson's disease: clinical features and diagnosis, J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, vol. 79, no. 4 (2008), p.368–376.

[2] K. R. Kaufman, C. Hughes, B. F. Morrey, M. Morrey, and K. N. An, Gait characteristics of patients with knee osteoarthritis., J. Biomech., vol. 34, no. 7 (2001), p.907–915.


[3] T. Pringsheim, N. Jette, A. Frolkis, and T. D. L. Steeves, The prevalence of Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Mov. Disord., vol. 29, no. 13 (2014), p.1583–1590.


[4] Y. Zhang and J. M. Jordan, Epidemiology of Osteoarthritis, Clin. Geriatr. Med., vol. 26, no. 3 (2010), p.355–369.

[5] R. Senden, B. Grimm, K. Meijer, H. Savelberg, and I. C. Heyligers, The importance to including objective functional outcomes in the clinical follow up of total knee arthroplasty patients., Knee, vol. 18, no. 5 (2011), p.306–11.


[6] F. Dobson, R. S. Hinman, E. M. Roos, J. H. Abbott, P. Stratford, A. M. Davis, R. Buchbinder, L. Snyder-Mackler, Y. Henrotin, J. Thumboo, P. Hansen, and K. L. Bennell, OARSI recommended performance-based tests to assess physical function in people diagnosed with hip or knee osteoarthritis., Osteoarthritis Cartilage, vol. 21, no. 8 (2013).


[7] E. E. Stone and M. Skubic, Unobtrusive, continuous, in-home gait measurement using the microsoft kinect, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 60, no. 10 (2013), p.2925–2932.


[8] B. Bilney, M. Morris, and K. Webster, Concurrent related validity of the GAITRite walkway system for quantification of the spatial and temporal parameters of gait, Gait Posture, vol. 17, no. 1 (2003), p.68–74.


[9] J. Klucken, J. Barth, P. Kugler, J. Schlachetzki, T. Henze, F. Marxreiter, Z. Kohl, R. Steidl, J. Hornegger, B. Eskofier, and J. Winkler, Unbiased and Mobile Gait Analysis Detects Motor Impairment in Parkinson's Disease, PLoS One, vol. 8, no. 2 (2013).


[10] S. A. Combs, M. D. Diehl, J. Filip, and E. Long, Short-distance walking speed tests in people with Parkinson disease: Reliability, responsiveness, and validity, Gait Posture, vol. 39, no. 2 (2014), p.784–788.


[11] D. Podsiadlo and S. Richardson, The timed Up & Go,: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons., J. Am. Geriatr. Soc., vol. 39, no. 2 (1991), p.142–8.


[12] A. Burns, B. R. Greene, M. J. McGrath, T. J. O'Shea, B. Kuris, S. M. Ayer, F. Stroiescu, and V. Cionca, SHIMMER – A Wireless Sensor Platform for Noninvasive Biomedical Research, IEEE Sens. J., vol. 10, no. 9 (2010), p.1527–1534.


[13] J. Barth, C. Oberndorfer, C. Pasluosta, S. Schülein, H. Gassner, S. Reinfelder, P. Kugler, D. Schuldhaus, J. Winkler, J. Klucken, and B. Eskofier, Stride Segmentation during Free Walk Movements Using Multi-Dimensional Subsequence Dynamic Time Warping on Inertial Sensor Data, Sensors, vol. 15, no. 3 (2015).


[14] A. Rampp, J. Barth, S. Schülein, K. -G. Gaßmann, J. Klucken, and B. M. Eskofier, Inertial Sensor Based Stride Parameter Calculation from Gait Sequences in Geriatric Patients, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 62, no. 4 (2014), p.1089 – 1097.


[15] M. R. Alam, M. B. I. Reaz, and M. A. M. Ali, A Review of Smart Homes - Past, Present, and Future, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybern. Part C, vol. 42, no. 6 (2012), p.1190–1203.