Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Protocol

Protocol of a systematic review on the application of wearable inertial sensors to quantify everyday life motor activity in people with mobility impairments

Authors: Fabian Marcel Rast, Rob Labruyère

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

People with mobility impairments may have difficulties in everyday life motor activities, and assessing these difficulties is crucial to plan rehabilitation interventions and evaluate their effectiveness. Wearable inertial sensors enable long-term monitoring of motor activities in a patient’s habitual environment and complement clinical assessments which are conducted in a standardised environment. The application of wearable sensors requires appropriate data processing algorithms to estimate clinically meaningful outcome measures, and this review will provide an overview of previously published measures, their underlying algorithms, sensor placement, and measurement properties such as validity, reproducibility, and feasibility.

Methods

We will screen the literature for studies which applied inertial sensors to people with mobility impairments in free-living conditions, described the data processing algorithm reproducibly, and calculated everyday life motor activity-related outcome measures. Three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS) will be searched with terms out of four different categories: study population, measurement tool, algorithm, and outcome measure. Abstracts and full texts will be screened independently by the two review authors, and disagreement will be solved by discussion and consensus. Data will be extracted by one of the review authors and verified by the other. It includes the type of outcome measures, the underlying data processing algorithm, the required sensor technology, the corresponding sensor placement, the measurement properties, and the target population. We expect to find a high heterogeneity of outcome measures and will therefore provide a narrative synthesis of the extracted data.

Discussion

This review will facilitate the selection of an appropriate sensor setup for future applications, contain recommendations about the design of data processing algorithms as well as their evaluation procedure, and present a gap for innovative, new algorithms, and devices.

Systematic review registration

International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42017069865.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
3.
go back to reference Del Din S, Hickey A, Woodman S, Hiden H, Morris R, Watson P, et al. Accelerometer-based gait assessment: pragmatic deployment on an international scale. In: IEEE Statistical Signal Processing Workshop; 2016. p. 1–5. Del Din S, Hickey A, Woodman S, Hiden H, Morris R, Watson P, et al. Accelerometer-based gait assessment: pragmatic deployment on an international scale. In: IEEE Statistical Signal Processing Workshop; 2016. p. 1–5.
4.
go back to reference Del Din S, Godfrey A, Mazza C, Lord S, Rochester L. Free-living monitoring of Parkinson’s disease: lessons from the field. Mov Disord. 2016;31:1293–313.CrossRef Del Din S, Godfrey A, Mazza C, Lord S, Rochester L. Free-living monitoring of Parkinson’s disease: lessons from the field. Mov Disord. 2016;31:1293–313.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Cervantes CM, Porretta DL. Physical activity measurement among individuals with disabilities: a literature review. Adapt Phys Act Q. 2010;27:173–90. Cervantes CM, Porretta DL. Physical activity measurement among individuals with disabilities: a literature review. Adapt Phys Act Q. 2010;27:173–90.
6.
go back to reference Ainsworth BE. How do I measure physical activity in my patients? Questionnaires and objective methods. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43:6–9.CrossRef Ainsworth BE. How do I measure physical activity in my patients? Questionnaires and objective methods. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43:6–9.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Hey S, Anastasopoulou P, von HB. Erfassung körperlicher Aktivität mittels Akzelerometrie – Möglichkeiten und Grenzen aus technischer Sicht. Bewegungstherapie Gesundheitssport. 2014;30:73–8.CrossRef Hey S, Anastasopoulou P, von HB. Erfassung körperlicher Aktivität mittels Akzelerometrie – Möglichkeiten und Grenzen aus technischer Sicht. Bewegungstherapie Gesundheitssport. 2014;30:73–8.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Bonomi AG, Westerterp KR. Advances in physical activity monitoring and lifestyle interventions in obesity: a review. Int J Obes. 2012;36:167–77.CrossRef Bonomi AG, Westerterp KR. Advances in physical activity monitoring and lifestyle interventions in obesity: a review. Int J Obes. 2012;36:167–77.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Melanson EL, Knoll JR, Bell ML, Donahoo WT, Hill JO, Nysse LJ, et al. Commercially available pedometers: considerations for accurate step counting. Prev Med. 2004;39:361–8.CrossRef Melanson EL, Knoll JR, Bell ML, Donahoo WT, Hill JO, Nysse LJ, et al. Commercially available pedometers: considerations for accurate step counting. Prev Med. 2004;39:361–8.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Garofalo P. Healthcare applications based on MEMS technology. Adv Microelectron. 2012;39:24–8. Garofalo P. Healthcare applications based on MEMS technology. Adv Microelectron. 2012;39:24–8.
11.
go back to reference Dobkin BH. Wearable motion sensors to continuously measure real-world physical activities. Curr Opin Neurol. 2013;26:602–8.CrossRef Dobkin BH. Wearable motion sensors to continuously measure real-world physical activities. Curr Opin Neurol. 2013;26:602–8.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lowe SA, Ólaighin G. Monitoring human health behaviour in one’s living environment: a technological review. Med Eng Phys. 2014;36:147–68.CrossRef Lowe SA, Ólaighin G. Monitoring human health behaviour in one’s living environment: a technological review. Med Eng Phys. 2014;36:147–68.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Brogioli M, Popp WL, Albisser U, Brust AK, Frotzler A, Gassert R, et al. Novel sensor technology to assess Independence and limb-use laterality in cervical spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma. 2016;33:1950–7.CrossRef Brogioli M, Popp WL, Albisser U, Brust AK, Frotzler A, Gassert R, et al. Novel sensor technology to assess Independence and limb-use laterality in cervical spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma. 2016;33:1950–7.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Popp WL, Brogioli M, Leuenberger K, Albisser U, Frotzler A, Curt A, et al. A novel algorithm for detecting active propulsion in wheelchair users following spinal cord injury. Med Eng Phys. 2016;38:267–74.CrossRef Popp WL, Brogioli M, Leuenberger K, Albisser U, Frotzler A, Curt A, et al. A novel algorithm for detecting active propulsion in wheelchair users following spinal cord injury. Med Eng Phys. 2016;38:267–74.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Leuenberger K, Gonzenbach R, Wiedmer E, Luft A, Gassert R. Classification of Stair Ascent and Descent in Stroke Patients. 2014 11th Int Conf Wearable Implant Body Sens Netw Workshop; 2014. p. 11–6. Leuenberger K, Gonzenbach R, Wiedmer E, Luft A, Gassert R. Classification of Stair Ascent and Descent in Stroke Patients. 2014 11th Int Conf Wearable Implant Body Sens Netw Workshop; 2014. p. 11–6.
16.
go back to reference Dobkin BH. A rehabilitation-internet-of-things in the home to augment motor skills and exercise training. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017;31:217–27.CrossRef Dobkin BH. A rehabilitation-internet-of-things in the home to augment motor skills and exercise training. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017;31:217–27.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Albert MV, Shparii I, Zhao X. The applicability of inertial motion sensors for locomotion and posture. In: Barbieri FA, Vitório R, editors. Locomotion and posture in older adults. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 417–26.CrossRef Albert MV, Shparii I, Zhao X. The applicability of inertial motion sensors for locomotion and posture. In: Barbieri FA, Vitório R, editors. Locomotion and posture in older adults. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 417–26.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.CrossRef Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Jeran S, Steinbrecher A, Pischon T. Prediction of activity-related energy expenditure using accelerometer-derived physical activity under free-living conditions: a systematic review. Int J Obes 2005. 2016;40:1187–97. Jeran S, Steinbrecher A, Pischon T. Prediction of activity-related energy expenditure using accelerometer-derived physical activity under free-living conditions: a systematic review. Int J Obes 2005. 2016;40:1187–97.
20.
go back to reference Van Remoortel H, Giavedoni S, Raste Y, Burtin C, Louvaris Z, Gimeno-Santos E, et al. Validity of activity monitors in health and chronic disease: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9:84.CrossRef Van Remoortel H, Giavedoni S, Raste Y, Burtin C, Louvaris Z, Gimeno-Santos E, et al. Validity of activity monitors in health and chronic disease: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9:84.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Protocol of a systematic review on the application of wearable inertial sensors to quantify everyday life motor activity in people with mobility impairments
Authors
Fabian Marcel Rast
Rob Labruyère
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0824-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Systematic Reviews 1/2018 Go to the issue