Accuracy of Video-Based Gait Analysis Using Pose Estimation During Treadmill Walking Versus Overground Walking in Persons After Stroke.
Kristen John, Jan Stenum, Cheng-Chuan Chiang and 6 others
PMID 37682075WHAT IT FOUND
Sagittal video of overground walking tracked hip and knee motion more accurately than treadmill video.
Treadmill video matched overground for step length and time but struggled with ankle angles and asymmetry. Use sagittal overground views for kinematics if space allows.
Key findings
01Sagittal videos of overground walking resulted in more accurate measurements of lower extremity joint kinematics than sagittal videos of treadmill walking.
02Video-based measurements of hip and knee kinematics were more accurate and reliable than measurements of ankle kinematics.
03Sagittal videos of overground and treadmill walking result in similarly accurate measurements of spatiotemporal gait parameters.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study only tested one pose estimation algorithm (OpenPose), so results may not apply to other video analysis apps. Treadmill recording used a single camera facing the right side, which occluded the left leg in most participants. The sample was limited to persons with chronic stroke and did not include other neurologic conditions. Ankle kinematics showed poor reliability, likely due to difficulties tracking foot keypoints against the treadmill background.
Declared interests
The funders played no role in the design, conduct, or reporting of this study. The authors reported no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume video-based gait analysis is equally accurate for all joints or settings. The study found that ankle kinematics and asymmetry measures were less reliable, particularly during treadmill walking, so these should be interpreted with caution.