Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Self-selected speed is an important functional index of walking. A self-pacing controller that reliably matches walking speed without additional hardware can be useful for measuring self-selected speed in a treadmill-based laboratory.
Methods: We adapted a previously proposed self-pacing controller for force-instrumented treadmills and validated its use for measuring self-selected speeds. We first evaluated the controller's estimation of subject speed and position from the force-plates by comparing it to those from motion capture data. We then compared five tests of self-selected speed. Ten healthy adults completed a standard 10-meter walk test, a 150-meter walk test, a commonly used manual treadmill speed selection test, a two-minute self-paced treadmill test, and a 150-meter self-paced treadmill test. In each case, subjects were instructed to walk at or select their comfortable speed. We also assessed the time taken for a trial and a survey on comfort and ease of choosing a speed in all the tests.
Results: The self-pacing algorithm estimated subject speed and position accurately, with root mean square differences compared to motion capture of 0.023 m s and 0.014 m, respectively. Self-selected speeds from both self-paced treadmill tests correlated well with those from the 10-meter walk test (R>0.93,p<1×10). Subjects walked slower on average in the self-paced treadmill tests (1.23±0.27 ms) than in the 10-meter walk test (1.32±0.18 ms) but the speed differences within subjects were consistent. These correlations and walking speeds are comparable to those from the manual treadmill speed selection test (R=0.89,p=3×10;1.18±0.24 ms). Comfort and ease of speed selection were similar in the self-paced tests and the manual speed selection test, but the self-paced tests required only about a third of the time to complete. Our results demonstrate that these self-paced treadmill tests can be a strong alternative to the commonly used manual treadmill speed selection test.
Conclusions: The self-paced force-instrumented treadmill well adapts to subject walking speed and reliably measures self-selected walking speeds. We provide the self-pacing software to facilitate use by gait researchers and clinicians.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7268460 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-020-00683-5 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!