Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 11, 2026
Quantified Assessment of Infant's Gross Motor Abilities Using a Multisensor Wearable
Published on: May 17, 2024
Wearable inertial sensors for paediatric gait assessment: A systematic review
Luckshman Bavan1, Kelvin Ng2, Richard Gardner1
1The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G1X8, Canada; Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, Bloorview Research Institute, 150 Kilgour Road, Toronto, ON M4G 1R8, Canada; Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada.
Background:
Instrumented gait analysis is an important tool for evaluating ambulatory function in children with gait impairments, yet conventional laboratory-based systems require specialised facilities and personnel, limiting availability in some settings. Wearable inertial measurement units (IMUs) provide a practical means of capturing gait parameters in clinical and real-world environments.
Objectives:
To systematically review the literature on IMU-based gait assessment in children, with a focus on readiness for clinical implementation, examining sensor configurations, reported gait metrics, and experimental methodologies.
Methods:
A systematic search of six databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, CINAHL) was conducted to identify English-language studies assessing spatiotemporal, kinematic, or kinetic gait parameters using IMUs in children (<18 years) under typical walking conditions. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and evaluated methodological quality using the AXIS tool.
Results:
Forty-five studies met inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight involved children with gait-affecting conditions (e.g. cerebral palsy). Single-sensor lumbar setups were common for spatiotemporal assessment (e.g. stride-time, cadence and speed), while multi-sensor configurations enabled kinematic analysis. Thirteen studies validated IMU-derived metrics against optical motion capture or pressure-sensitive walkways. Spatiotemporal parameters often showed high agreement with reference standards. Sagittal-plane joint angles demonstrated moderate-to-high accuracy, with poorer accuracy in frontal and transverse planes. Agreement and reliability were lower in children with gait impairments than in typically developing cohorts. Reporting of setup and processing methods was often incomplete.
Conclusion:
IMUs demonstrate strong potential as accessible, cost-effective tools for paediatric gait assessment. Progress toward clinical translation requires standardised reporting, paediatric-focused algorithm development, and broader validation across ages and diagnoses.
