↓ Skip to main content

Reliability of inertial sensors in the assessment of patients with vestibular disorders: a feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reliability of inertial sensors in the assessment of patients with vestibular disorders: a feasibility study
Published in
BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12901-017-0034-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sathish K. Sankarpandi, Alice J. Baldwin, Jaydip Ray, Claudia Mazzà

Abstract

Vestibular disorders affect an individual's stability, balance, and gait and predispose them to falls. Traditional laboratory-based semi-objective vestibular assessments are intrusive and cumbersome provide little information about their functional ability. Commercially available wearable inertial sensors allow us to make this real life assessments objective, with a detailed view of their functional abilities. Timed Up and Go (TUG) and Postural Sway tests are commonly used tests for gait and balance assessments. Our aim was to assess the feasibility, test-retest reliability and ability to classify fall status in individuals with vestibular disorders using parameters derived from the commercially available wearable system (inertial sensors and the Mobility Lab Software, APDM, Inc.). We recruited 27 individuals diagnosed either with unilateral or bilateral vestibular loss on vestibular function testing. Instrumented Timed Up and Go (iTUG) and Postural Sway (iSway) were administered three times during the first session and then repeated at a similar time the following week. To evaluate within and between sessions reliability of the parameters the Intra-Class Correlation coefficient (ICC) was used. Subsequently, the ability of reliable parameters (ICC ≥ 0.8) to classify fallers from non-fallers was estimated. The iTUG test parameters showed good within and between sessions' reliability with mean ICC (between-sessions) values of 0.81 ± 0.17 and 0.69 ± 0.15, respectively. For the iSway test, the relative figures were; 0.76 ± 0.13 and 0.71 ± 0.14, respectively. A retrospective falls classification analysis with past 12 months falls history data yielded an accuracy of 66.70% with an area under the curve of 0.79. Mean Distance from centre of COP (mm) of accelerometer's trajectory (m/s(2)) from the iSway test was the only significant parameter to classify fallers from non-fallers. Using a commercially available wearable system a subset of reliable iTUG and iSway parameters were identified and their ability to classify fallers were estimated. These parameters have potential to augment assessments of vestibular patients to enable clinicians and therapists to provide objective, tailored, personalised interventions for their gait and postural control and also to objectively evaluate and monitor the efficiency of their interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 23 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 21 19%
Engineering 17 16%
Neuroscience 15 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 10%
Sports and Recreations 7 6%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 25 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2018.
All research outputs
#13,859,387
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
#34
of 83 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,188
of 424,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them