Autonomous quality control of joint orientation measured with inertial sensors

15Citations
Citations of this article
93Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Clinical mobility assessment is traditionally performed in laboratories using complex and expensive equipment. The low accessibility to such equipment, combined with the emerging trend to assess mobility in a free-living environment, creates a need for body-worn sensors (e.g., inertial measurement units-IMUs) that are capable of measuring the complexity in motor performance using meaningful measurements, such as joint orientation. However, accuracy of joint orientation estimates using IMUs may be affected by environment, the joint tracked, type of motion performed and velocity. This study investigates a quality control (QC) process to assess the quality of orientation data based on features extracted from the raw inertial sensors’ signals. Joint orientation (trunk, hip, knee, ankle) of twenty participants was acquired by an optical motion capture system and IMUs during a variety of tasks (sit, sit-to-stand transition, walking, turning) performed under varying conditions (speed, environment). An artificial neural network was used to classify good and bad sequences of joint orientation with a sensitivity and a specificity above 83%. This study confirms the possibility to perform QC on IMU joint orientation data based on raw signal features. This innovative QC approach may be of particular interest in a big data context, such as for remote-monitoring of patients’ mobility.

Figures

  • Figure 1. Joint orientation estimates quality control process overview.
  • Table 1. QC Input Features.
  • Figure 2. Artificial neural network architecture. The 16 inputs correspond to the features based on raw inertial signals defined in Table 1. Features are then processed at the hidden layer level composed of six neurons. Weights and bias are attributed for all inputs during the training process and neuron are activated following a symmetric sigmoid function. The resulting activation patterns are then again adjusted (output layer’s weights and bias) and summed up to determine the final classification.
  • Figure 3. Setup and protocol. Joint accuracy validation is accomplished by comparison of the orientation data estimated by the AHRS with those obtained from an optical motion capture gold standard, VICON. (A) A subset of the AHRS is solidly affixed to a rigid body created with a minimum of four optical markers; (B) The assembled bundles are then placed on the body segments targ ted for evaluation, namely the head, the upper trunk, the pelvis, and the left lower limb (thigh, shank, f ot); (C) Twenty participants with a variety of anth opometric haracteristics participated in this study, ensuring diverse conditions of realizatio of t tasks; (D) Participants ere asked to perform a 5 m standardized timed-up and go (TUG), a recognized clinical test including a number of basic mobility tasks. Tests were performed along two different paths and at different velocities.
  • Figure 4. Data processing overall workflow using an ANN for joint orientation estimates quality control. (A) The 20 participants enrolled in the study were first divided into two groups, the first 10 being dedicated to the training of the QC algorithm while the other 10 allowed for validation of the algorithm; (B) Trials performed by the participants belonging to the training group were segmented into low-level tasks (sitting, sit-to-stand transfer, walking, turning, and turn-to-sit). For each data segment, a set of features based on the IMU raw signals were extracted. The ANN was then trained as long as satisfactory results regarding sensitivity and specificity are achieved and the resulting ANN becomes the so-called QC algorithm; (C) The performance of the QC algorithm is then verified using trials from another set of 10 participants (i.e., validation group).
  • Figure 5. Effect of data quality control using a neural network approach on (A) quality of sequence distribution and (B) joint orientation accuracy for a diversity of tasks.
  • Table 2. Impact of autonomous quality control of orientation data sequences per task and joint.

References Powered by Scopus

The reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: A systematic review

822Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

IMU-based joint angle measurement for gait analysis

676Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Compensation of magnetic disturbances improves inertial and magnetic sensing of human body segment orientation

491Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Multidimensional Ground Reaction Forces and Moments from Wearable Sensor Accelerations via Deep Learning

70Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Using Inertial Sensors to Automatically Detect and Segment Activities of Daily Living in People with Parkinson's Disease

65Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Inertial measurement systems for segments and joints kinematics assessment: Towards an understanding of the variations in sensors accuracy

50Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lebel, K., Boissy, P., Nguyen, H., & Duval, C. (2016). Autonomous quality control of joint orientation measured with inertial sensors. Sensors (Switzerland), 16(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/s16071037

Readers over time

‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2508162432

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 44

77%

Professor / Associate Prof. 8

14%

Researcher 5

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 19

40%

Medicine and Dentistry 14

30%

Computer Science 10

21%

Nursing and Health Professions 4

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0