title: Reliability of spatiotemporal and kinetic gait parameters determined by a new instrumented treadmill system.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Despite the emerging use of treadmills integrated with pressure platforms as outcome tools in both clinical and research settings, published evidence regarding the measurement properties of these new systems is limited. This study evaluated the within- and between-day repeatability of spatial, temporal and vertical ground reaction force parameters measured by a treadmill system instrumented with a capacitance-based pressure platform.
  
  
  METHODS
  Thirty three healthy adults (mean age, 21.5 ± 2.8 years; height, 168.4 ± 9.9 cm; and mass, 67.8 ± 18.6 kg), walked barefoot on a treadmill system (FDM-THM-S, Zebris Medical GmbH) on three separate occasions. For each testing session, participants set their preferred pace but were blinded to treadmill speed. Spatial (foot rotation, step width, stride and step length), temporal (stride and step times, duration of stance, swing and single and double support) and peak vertical ground reaction force variables were collected over a 30-second capture period, equating to an average of 52 ± 5 steps of steady-state walking. Testing was repeated one week following the initial trial and again, for a third time, 20 minutes later. Repeated measures ANOVAs within a generalized linear modelling framework were used to assess between-session differences in gait parameters. Agreement between gait parameters measured within the same day (session 2 and 3) and between days (session 1 and 2; 1 and 3) were evaluated using the 95% repeatability coefficient.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were statistically significant differences in the majority (14/16) of temporal, spatial and kinetic gait parameters over the three test sessions (P < .01). The minimum change that could be detected with 95% confidence ranged between 3% and 17% for temporal parameters, 14% and 33% for spatial parameters, and 4% and 20% for kinetic parameters between days. Within-day repeatability was similar to that observed between days. Temporal and kinetic gait parameters were typically more consistent than spatial parameters. The 95% repeatability coefficient for vertical force peaks ranged between ± 53 and ± 63 N.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The limits of agreement in spatial parameters and ground reaction forces for the treadmill system encompass previously reported changes with neuromuscular pathology and footwear interventions. These findings provide clinicians and researchers with an indication of the repeatability and sensitivity of the Zebris treadmill system to detect changes in common spatiotemporal gait parameters and vertical ground reaction forces.
authors: School of Clinical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, 4059 Queensland, Australia. l.reed@qut.edu.au.
authors: Lloyd F
authors: LF
authors: Reed
authors: Stephen R
authors: SR
authors: Urry
authors: Scott C
authors: SC
authors: Wearing
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D025802:Electric Capacitance; D004867:Equipment Design; D005080:Exercise Test / Q000295:instrumentation*; D005260:Female; D005684:Gait; D064368:Healthy Volunteers; D006801:Humans; D007700:Kinetics; D016014:Linear Models; D008297:Male; D015588:Observer Variation; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014160:Transducers, Pressure; D016138:Walking; D055815:Young Adult
references: Gait Posture. 2007 Jun;26(1):128-34
references: 16982195
references: Gait Posture. 2011 Feb;33(2):314-7
references: 21183350
references: Gait Posture. 2012 Jul;36(3):444-8
references: 22555061
references: Exp Brain Res. 2012 Feb;216(3):473-82
references: 22108702
references: Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997 Dec;105(6):490-7
references: 9448652
references: J Appl Physiol (1985). 2002 May;92(5):1885-90
references: 11960938
references: Exp Neurol. 2011 Dec;232(2):162-7
references: 21910989
references: J Biomech Eng. 1996 May;118(2):253-5
references: 8738792
references: J Biomech. 2001 Jan;34(1):105-12
references: 11425069
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008 Dec;89(12):2360-5
references: 19061748
references: J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):231-40
references: 15705040
references: Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2008 Oct;36(4):200-4
references: 18815489
references: Gait Posture. 2004 Aug;20(1):26-9
references: 15196516
references: Gait Posture. 2013 Feb;37(2):214-8
references: 22840892
references: J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2009 Mar;49(1):6-13
references: 19188889
references: Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60
references: 10501650
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD007830
references: 20091652
references: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1996 Jul;11(5):253-259
references: 11415629
references: Gait Posture. 2008 May;27(4):572-7
references: 17768055
references: IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1997 Dec;5(4):322-30
references: 9422457
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47171
references: 23056604
references: J Appl Physiol (1985). 1989 Oct;67(4):1692-8
references: 2793769
references: J Physiother. 2010;56(2):97-103
references: 20482476
references: J Neurol Sci. 2012 Mar 15;314(1-2):78-82
references: 22099639
references: Int J Sports Med. 2011 Jan;32(1):35-44
references: 21072736
references: Ergonomics. 1981 Jul;24(7):531-42
references: 7333270
references: Biomed Mater Eng. 2006;16(1):43-52
references: 16410643
references: J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Oct;57(10):1008-18
references: 15528051
references: Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013 May;115(5):587-90
references: 22871383
references: J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997 Mar;45(3):313-20
references: 9063277
references: J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2011 Feb 24;8:12
references: 21345241