An automated, electronic assessment tool can accurately classify older adult postural stability.

Current methods of balance assessment in the clinical environment are often subjective, time-consuming and lack clinical relevance for non-ambulatory older adults. The objective of this study was to develop a novel method of balance assessment that utilizes data collected using the Microsoft Kinect 2 to create a Berg Balance Scale score, which is completely determined by statistical methods rather than by human evaluators. 74 older adults, both healthy and balance impaired, were recruited for this trial. All participants completed the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) which was scored independently by trained physical therapists. Participants then completed the items of the "Modified Berg Balance Scale" in front of the Microsoft Kinect camera. Kinematic data collected during this measurement was used to train a feed-forward neural network that was used to assign a Berg Balance Scale score. The neural network model estimated the clinician-assigned BBS score to within a median of 0.93 points for the participants in our sample population (range: 0.02-5.69). Using low-cost depth sensing camera technology and a clinical protocol that takes less than 5 min to complete in both ambulatory and non-ambulatory older adults, the method outlined in this manuscript can accurately predict a participant's BBS score and thereby identify whether they are deemed a high fall risk or not. If implemented correctly, this could enable fall prevention services to be deployed in a timely fashion using low-cost, accessible technology, resulting in improved safety of older adults.

Using data from the Microsoft Kinect 2 to determine postural stability in healthy subjects: A feasibility trial.

The objective of this study was to determine whether kinematic data collected by the Microsoft Kinect 2 (MK2) could be used to quantify postural stability in healthy subjects. Twelve subjects were recruited for the project, and were instructed to perform a sequence of simple postural stability tasks. The movement sequence was performed as subjects were seated on top of a force platform, and the MK2 was positioned in front of them. This sequence of tasks was performed by each subject under three different postural conditions: "both feet on the ground" (1), "One foot off the ground" (2), and "both feet off the ground" (3). We compared force platform and MK2 data to quantify the degree to which the MK2 was returning reliable data across subjects. We then applied a novel machine-learning paradigm to the MK2 data in order to determine the extent to which data from the MK2 could be used to reliably classify different postural conditions. Our initial comparison of force plate and MK2 data showed a strong agreement between the two devices, with strong Pearson correlations between the trunk centroids "Spine_Mid" (0.85 ± 0.06), "Neck" (0.86 ± 0.07) and "Head" (0.87 ± 0.07), and the center of pressure centroid inferred by the force platform. Mean accuracy for the machine learning classifier from MK2 was 97.0%, with a specific classification accuracy breakdown of 90.9%, 100%, and 100% for conditions 1 through 3, respectively. Mean accuracy for the machine learning classifier derived from the force platform data was lower at 84.4%. We conclude that data from the MK2 has sufficient information content to allow us to classify sequences of tasks being performed under different levels of postural stability. Future studies will focus on validating this protocol on large populations of individuals with actual balance impairments in order to create a toolkit that is clinically validated and available to the medical community.

Validation of the Leap Motion Controller using markered motion capture technology.

The Leap Motion Controller (LMC) is a low-cost, markerless motion capture device that tracks hand, wrist and forearm position. Integration of this technology into healthcare applications has begun to occur rapidly, making validation of the LMC׳s data output an important research goal. Here, we perform a detailed evaluation of the kinematic data output from the LMC, and validate this output against gold-standard, markered motion capture technology. We instructed subjects to perform three clinically-relevant wrist (flexion/extension, radial/ulnar deviation) and forearm (pronation/supination) movements. The movements were simultaneously tracked using both the LMC and a marker-based motion capture system from Motion Analysis Corporation (MAC). Adjusting for known inconsistencies in the LMC sampling frequency, we compared simultaneously acquired LMC and MAC data by performing Pearson׳s correlation (r) and root mean square error (RMSE). Wrist flexion/extension and radial/ulnar deviation showed good overall agreement (r=0.95; RMSE=11.6°, and r=0.92; RMSE=12.4°, respectively) with the MAC system. However, when tracking forearm pronation/supination, there were serious inconsistencies in reported joint angles (r=0.79; RMSE=38.4°). Hand posture significantly influenced the quality of wrist deviation (P<0.005) and forearm supination/pronation (P<0.001), but not wrist flexion/extension (P=0.29). We conclude that the LMC is capable of providing data that are clinically meaningful for wrist flexion/extension, and perhaps wrist deviation. It cannot yet return clinically meaningful data for measuring forearm pronation/supination. Future studies should continue to validate the LMC as updated versions of their software are developed.