The University of Sheffield
Browse
.MAT
RepeatabilityData.mat (332.25 MB)
.MAT
ReproducibilityData.mat (303.19 MB)
1/0
2 files

Kinematic data for the Concurrent repeatability and reproducibility analysis of four gait models for foot-ankle complex

dataset
posted on 2016-08-22, 14:56 authored by Roberto Di MarcoRoberto Di Marco, Stefano Rossi, Vitomir RacicVitomir Racic, Paolo Cappa, Claudia Mazza

Multi-segment models of the foot have been proposed in the past years to overcome limitations imposed by oversimplified traditional approaches used to describe foot kinematics, but they have been only partially validated and never compared. This paper presents a unique comparative assessment of the four most widely adopted foot kinematic models and aims to provide a guidance for the clinical interpretation of their results.

Sensitivity of the models to differences between treadmill and overground walking was tested in nine young healthy adults using a 1D paired t-test. Repeatability was assessed by investigating the joint kinematics obtained when the same operator placed the markers on thirteen young healthy adults in two occasions.  Reproducibility was then assessed using data from three randomly selected participants, asking three operators to repeat the marker placement three times. The analyses were performed on sagittal kinematics using curve similarity and correlation indices (Linear Fit Method) and absolute differences between selected points.

Differences between treadmill and overground gait were highlighted by all the investigated models. The two most repeatable and reproducible investigated models had average correlations higher than 0.70, with the lowest values (0.56) obtained for the midfoot. Averaged correlations were always higher than 0.74 for the former and 0.70 for the latter, with the lowest obtained for the midfoot (0.64 and 0.51). For all investigated models, foot kinematics generally showed low repeatability: normative bands must be adopted with caution when used for comparison with patient data.

Funding

EP/J013714/1

History

Ethics

  • There is no personal data or any that requires ethical approval

Policy

  • The data complies with the institution and funders' policies on access and sharing

Sharing and access restrictions

  • The data can be shared openly

Data description

  • The file formats are open or commonly used

Methodology, headings and units

  • Headings and units are explained in the files

Usage metrics

    Department of Mechanical Engineering

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC