The Reliability and Accuracy of a Fall Risk Assessment Procedure Using Mobile Smartphone Sensors Compared with a Physiological Profile Assessment.

Falls in older people are a major health concern as the leading cause of disability and the second most common cause of accidental death. We developed a rapid fall risk assessment based on a combination of physical performance measurements made with an inertial sensor embedded in a smartphone. This study aimed to evaluate and validate the reliability and accuracy of an easy-to-use smartphone fall risk assessment by comparing it with the Physiological Profile Assessment (PPA) results. Sixty-five participants older than 55 performed a variation of the Timed Up and Go test using smartphone sensors. Balance and gait parameters were calculated, and their reliability was assessed by the (ICC) and compared with the PPAs. Since the PPA allows classification into six levels of fall risk, the data obtained from the smartphone assessment were categorised into six equivalent levels using different parametric and nonparametric classifier models with neural networks. The F1 score and geometric mean of each model were also calculated. All selected parameters showed ICCs around 0.9. The best classifier, in terms of accuracy, was the nonparametric mixed input data model with a 100% success rate in the classification category. In conclusion, fall risk can be reliably assessed using a simple, fast smartphone protocol that allows accurate fall risk classification among older people and can be a useful screening tool in clinical settings.

A comparison of lumbopelvic motion patterns and erector spinae behavior between asymptomatic subjects and patients with recurrent low back pain during pain-free periods.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the patterns of lumbopelvic motion and erector spinae (ES) activity during trunk flexion-extension movements and to compare these patterns between patients with recurrent low back pain (LBP) in their pain-free periods and matched asymptomatic subjects. METHODS: Thirty subjects participated (15 patients with disc herniation and recurrent LBP in their pain-free periods and 15 asymptomatic control subjects). A 3-dimensional videophotogrammetric system and surface electromyography (EMG) were used to record the angular displacements of the lumbar spine and hip in the sagittal plane and the EMG activity of the ES during standardized trunk flexion-extension cycles. Variables were maximum ranges of spine and hip flexion; percentages of maximum lumbar and hip flexion at the start and end of ES relaxation; average percentages of EMG activity during flexion, relaxation, and extension; and flexion-extension ratio of myoelectrical activity. RESULTS: Recurrent LBP patients during their pain-free period showed significantly greater ES activation both in flexion and extension, with a higher flexion-extension ratio than controls. Maximum ranges of lumbar and hip flexion showed no differences between controls and patients, although patients spent less time with their lumbar spine maximally flexed. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that reduced maximum ranges of motion and absence of ES flexion-relaxation phenomenon were not useful to identify LBP patients in the absence of acute pain. However, these patients showed subtle alterations of their lumbopelvic motion and ES activity patterns, which may have important clinical implications.

Reliability and validity of a new objective tool for low back pain functional assessment.

STUDY DESIGN: Classification and functional assessment model for nonspecific low back pain (LBP) patients and controls on the basis of kinematic analysis parameters. OBJECTIVE: Develop a logistic regression model using kinematic analysis variables to (1) discriminate between LBP patients and controls and (2) obtain objective parameters for LBP functional assessment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Functional assessment of spinal disorders has been carried out traditionally by means of subjective scales. Objective functional techniques have been developed, which usually involve the application of external loads or the analysis of highly standardized trunk flexion-extension maneuvers. Few studies have used everyday activities such as sit-to-stand or lifting an object from the ground. They have shown that the motion patterns of LBP patients differ from those of healthy subjects. Nevertheless, very few studies have tried to correlate objective findings to the results of subjective scales, and no previous study has developed a LBP classification and functional assessment model on the basis of kinematic analysis of everyday activities. METHODS: Sixteen controls and 39 LBP patients performed a sit-to-stand task, and lifted three different weights from a standing position. The vertical forces exerted and the relative positions of the lower limb and the cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and sacroiliac regions were recorded. Reliability was determined from repetitions of the tests performed by the control group. Binary logistic regression analyses were computed. The results of the selected regression equation were correlated to the Oswestry Disability Index scale results, to check the validity of the procedure for the measurement of functional disability. RESULTS: Reliability of the parameters was good. The selected regression model used two variables, and correctly classified 97.3% of the patients. High correlations were found between the results of this regression equation and the Oswestry Disability Index scale. CONCLUSION: It is possible to distinguish LBP patients from healthy subjects by means of the biomechanical analysis of everyday tasks. This kind of analysis can produce objective and reliable indexes about the patients' degree of functional impairment.

Neck motion patterns in whiplash-associated disorders: quantifying variability and spontaneity of movement.

BACKGROUND: whiplash-associated disorders have usually been explored by analyzing changes in the cervical motor system function by means of static variables such as the range of motion, whereas other behavioural features such as speed, variability or smoothness of movement have aroused less interest. METHODS: whiplash patients (n=30), control subjects (n=29) and a group of people faking the symptoms of whiplash-associated-disorders (Simulators, n=30) performed a cyclical flexion-extension movement. This movement was recorded by means of video-photogrammetry. The computed variables were: range of motion, maxima angular velocity and acceleration, and two additional variables that quantify the repeatability of a motion and its spontaneity. Two comparisons were made: Control vs. Patients and Patients vs. Simulators. At each comparison we used ANOVA to detect differences between groups and discriminant analysis to evaluate the ability of these variables to classify individuals. FINDINGS: comparison between Controls and Patients showed significant reductions in the range of motion, and both the maximum of angular velocity and acceleration in the Patients. The most efficient discriminant model only included the range of motion and maximum angular velocity. Comparison between Patients and Simulators showed a significant reduction in all measured variables in the Simulators. The best classification model was obtained with maximum angular velocity, spontaneity and repeatability of motion. INTERPRETATION: our results suggest that the pathological patterns differ from those of Controls in amplitude and speed of motion, but not in repeatability or spontaneity of movement. These variables are especially useful for detecting abnormal movement patterns.