Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 27, 2026
Clinical Assessment of Spatiotemporal Gait Parameters in Patients and Older Adults
Published on: November 7, 2014
Investigating the association between self-reported physical function, temporo-spatial parameters, walking kinematics
Wilshaw R Stevens1, Nicholas R Anable1, Cody Barrett1
1Scottish Rite for Children, TX, USA.
Introduction:
Wearable sensors provide the ability to assess ambulatory activity in the community after hip preservation surgery (HPS). In combination with gait analysis and patient reported outcomes, more perspective on post-operative function is gained. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between self-reported function/activity, temporo-spatial parameters and walking kinematics to objectively measured ambulatory activity.
Methods:
Forty-nine participants (38 Females; age range 16-38 years) who were five years or more post-surgery and the following diagnoses were included: Acetabular Dysplasia (n=34), Femoroacetabular Impingement (n=12) and Legg-Calvé Perthes disease (n=3). Participants underwent 3D gait analysis and gait deviations were quantified using the Gait Deviation Index (GDI) and Gait Profile Score (GPS). Temporo-spatial parameters were also calculated. Self-reported pain/function and activity level were assessed via the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and UCLA Activity Scale (UCLA). Participants wore a StepWatch Activity Monitor in their community and the Intensity/Duration of ambulatory bouts were analyzed. Spearman correlation coefficients were run to assess the following relationships: in-lab walking measures, self-reported function/activity vs.community ambulatory activity.
Results:
There were no statistically significant correlations between HHS, UCLA or temporospatial parameters with ambulatory activity (p>0.05). Worsening gait deviations (GDI/GPS scores) correlated with daily total ambulatory time (ρ=0.284/-0.284, p<0.05), time spent in Short duration ambulatory bouts (ρ=-0.321/0.321, p<0.05) and the amount of time in Long duration ambulatory bouts (ρ=0.366/-0.366, p<0.05). The amount of time spent in Easy intensity/Short duration and Easy intensity/Long duration ambulatory bouts did have a weak correlation with the GDI and GPS (p<0.05).
Conclusions:
In HPS patients after long-term follow up, ambulatory activity in the community did not correlate with patient reported outcomes but there was a weak correlation with the presence of gait deviations. Incorporating wearable sensors to assess community ambulatory bout intensity/duration, provides additional quantifiable measures into the overall function of patients following HPS.
