The comparison of normative reference data from different gait analysis services.

Comparison of normative data between gait analysis services offers the potential to harmonise data collection protocols. This paper presents a method for such a comparison based on an assumption that the root mean square difference from the inter-service mean is a reflection of systematic differences in protocols and that the average standard deviation includes a component attributable to within-centre measurement variability. Substantial normative datasets from two highly respected clinical services were compared. The RMS difference for the difference from the inter-centre mean was less than 1.7° for all kinematic variables apart from hip rotation (2.9°) and foot progression (2.1°), less than 0.1 Nm/kg for all joint moments and than 0.21 W/kg for all joint powers. The two centres showed very similar normative standard deviations. The data demonstrates a high degree of consistency between data from two highly regarded gait analysis services and establishes a baseline against which other services can assess their performance. An electronic appendix includes data to facilitate this comparison.

[1]  James G Wright,et al.  Pro: Interobserver Variability of Gait Analysis , 2003 .

[2]  M. Morris,et al.  The reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: a systematic review. , 2009, Gait & posture.

[3]  Kathy Martin.  Measuring Walking: A Handbook of Clinical Gait Analysis , 2014 .

[4]  Michael H Schwartz,et al.  The effect of walking speed on the gait of typically developing children. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[5]  M P Kadaba,et al.  Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking , 1990, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[6]  Victoria L Chester,et al.  Comparison of two normative paediatric gait databases , 2007, Dynamic medicine : DM.

[7]  Richard Baker,et al.  A new approach to determine the hip rotation profile from clinical gait analysis data , 1999 .

[8]  H. K. Ramakrishnan,et al.  Repeatability of kinematic, kinetic, and electromyographic data in normal adult gait , 1989, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[9]  Joyce P Trost,et al.  Measurement and management of errors in quantitative gait data. , 2004, Gait & posture.

[10]  George E Gorton,et al.  Assessment of the kinematic variability among 12 motion analysis laboratories. , 2009, Gait & posture.

[11]  Suzanne Halliday,et al.  Interobserver Variability of Gait Analysis in Patients With Cerebral Palsy , 2003, Journal of pediatric orthopedics.

[12]  R. B. Davis,et al.  A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique , 1991 .

[13]  M. Schwartz,et al.  A new method for estimating joint parameters from motion data. , 2004, Journal of biomechanics.

[14]  Roy B. Davis,et al.  Joint kinetics: methods, interpretation and treatment decision-making in children with cerebral palsy and myelomeningocele , 1996 .

[15]  Richard Baker.  Measuring Walking: A Handbook of Clinical Gait Analysis , 2013 .

[16]  H. Woltring.  On optimal smoothing and derivative estimation from noisy displacement data in biomechanics , 1985 .

[17]  B Durward,et al.  Defining phases for the sit-to-walk movement. , 2004, Clinical biomechanics.

[18]  James C Wall,et al.  Basic gait parameters: a comparison of reference data for normal subjects 20 to 29 years of age from Kuwait and Scandinavia. , 2003, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[19]  James R. Gage,et al.  Con: Interobserver Variability of Gait Analysis , 2003 .