Background: Running gait assessment has traditionally been performed using subjective observation or expensive laboratory-based objective technologies, such as three-dimensional motion capture or force plates. However, recent developments in wearable devices allow for continuous monitoring and analysis of running mechanics in any environment. Objective measurement of running gait is an important (clinical) tool for injury assessment and provides measures that can be used to enhance performance.Objectives: We aimed to systematically review the available literature investigating how wearable technology is being used for running gait analysis in adults.Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted in the following scientific databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus. Information was extracted from each included article regarding the type of study, participants, protocol, wearable device(s), main outcomes/measures, analysis and key findings.Results: A total of 131 articles were reviewed: 56 investigated the validity of wearable technology, 22 examined the reliability and 77 focused on applied use. Most studies used inertial measurement units (n = 62) [i.e. a combination of accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometers in a single unit] or solely accelerometers (n = 40), with one using gyroscopes alone and 31 using pressure sensors. On average, studies used one wearable device to examine running gait. Wearable locations were distributed among the shank, shoe and waist. The mean number of participants was 26 (± 27), with an average age of 28.3 (± 7.0) years. Most studies took place indoors (n = 93), using a treadmill (n = 62), with the main aims seeking to identify running gait outcomes or investigate the effects of injury, fatigue, intrinsic factors (e.g. age, sex, morphology) or footwear on running gait outcomes. Generally, wearables were found to be valid and reliable tools for assessing running gait compared to reference standards.Conclusions: This comprehensive review highlighted that most studies that have examined running gait using wearable sensors have done so with young adult recreational runners, using one inertial measurement unit sensor, with participants running on a treadmill and reporting outcomes of ground contact time, stride length, stride frequency and tibial acceleration. Future studies are required to obtain consensus regarding terminology, protocols for testing validity and the reliability of devices and suitability of gait outcomes.Clinical Trial Registration: CRD42021235527.

Introduction: Gait impairment occurs across the spectrum of traumatic brain injury (TBI); from mild (mTBI) to moderate (modTBI), to severe (sevTBI). Recent evidence suggests that objective gait assessment may be a surrogate marker for neurological impairment such as TBI. However, the most optimal method of objective gait assessment is still not well understood due to previous reliance on subjective assessment approaches. The purpose of this review was to examine objective assessment of gait impairments across the spectrum of TBI. Methods: PubMed, AMED, OVID and CINAHL databases were searched with a search strategy containing key search terms for TBI and gait. Original research articles reporting gait outcomes in adults with TBI (mTBI, modTBI, sevTBI) were included. Results: 156 citations were identified from the search, of these, 13 studies met the initial criteria and were included into the review. The findings from the reviewed studies suggest that gait is impaired in mTBI, modTBI and sevTBI (in acute and chronic stages), but methodological limitations were evident within all studies. Inertial measurement units were most used to assess gait, with single-task, dual-task and obstacle crossing conditions used. No studies examined gait across the full spectrum of TBI and all studies differed in their gait assessment protocols. Recommendations for future studies are provided. Conclusion: Gait was found to be impaired in TBI within the reviewed studies regardless of severity level (mTBI, modTBI, sevTBI), but methodological limitations of studies (transparency and reproducibility) limit clinical application. Further research is required to establish a standardised gait assessment procedure to fully determine gait impairment across the spectrum of TBI with comprehensive outcomes and consistent protocols.

Walking/gait quality is a useful clinical tool to assess general health and is now broadly described as the sixth vital sign. This has been mediated by advances in sensing technology, including instrumented walkways and three-dimensional motion capture. However, it is wearable technology innovation that has spawned the highest growth in instrumented gait assessment due to the capabilities for monitoring within and beyond the laboratory. Specifically, instrumented gait assessment with wearable inertial measurement units (IMUs) has provided more readily deployable devices for use in any environment. Contemporary IMU-based gait assessment research has shown evidence of the robust quantifying of important clinical gait outcomes in, e.g., neurological disorders to gather more insightful habitual data in the home and community, given the relatively low cost and portability of IMUs. The aim of this narrative review is to describe the ongoing research regarding the need to move gait assessment out of bespoke settings into habitual environments and to consider the shortcomings and inefficiencies that are common within the field. Accordingly, we broadly explore how the Internet of Things (IoT) could better enable routine gait assessment beyond bespoke settings. As IMU-based wearables and algorithms mature in their corroboration with alternate technologies, such as computer vision, edge computing, and pose estimation, the role of IoT communication will enable new opportunities for remote gait assessment.

Gait assessment is essential to understand injury prevention mechanisms during running, where high-impact forces can lead to a range of injuries in the lower extremities. Information regarding the running style to increase efficiency and/or selection of the correct running equipment, such as shoe type, can minimize the risk of injury, e.g., matching a runner's gait to a particular set of cushioning technologies found in modern shoes (neutral/support cushioning). Awareness of training or selection of the correct equipment requires an understanding of a runner's biomechanics, such as determining foot orientation when it strikes the ground. Previous work involved a low-cost approach with a foot-mounted inertial measurement unit (IMU) and an associated zero-crossing-based methodology to objectively understand a runner's biomechanics (in any setting) to learn about shoe selection. Here, an investigation of the previously presented ZC-based methodology is presented only to determine general validity for running gait assessment in a range of running abilities from novice (8 km/h) to experienced (16 km/h+). In comparison to Vicon 3D motion tracking data, the presented approach can extract pronation, foot strike location, and ground contact time with good [ICC_(2,1) > 0.750] to excellent [ICC_(2,1) > 0.900] agreement between 8–12 km/h runs. However, at higher speeds (14 km/h+), the ZC-based approach begins to deteriorate in performance, suggesting that other features and approaches may be more suitable for faster running and sprinting tasks.

Running gait assessment is essential for the development of technical optimization strategies as well as to inform injury prevention and rehabilitation. Currently, running gait assessment relies on (i) visual assessment, exhibiting subjectivity and limited reliability, or (ii) use of instrumented approaches, which often carry high costs and can be intrusive due to the attachment of equipment to the body. Here, the use of an IoT-enabled markerless computer vision smartphone application based upon Google’s pose estimation model BlazePose was evaluated for running gait assessment for use in low-resource settings. That human pose estimation architecture was used to extract contact time, swing time, step time, knee flexion angle, and foot strike location from a large cohort of runners. The gold-standard Vicon 3D motion capture system was used as a reference. The proposed approach performs robustly, demonstrating good (ICC(2,1) > 0.75) to excellent (ICC(2,1) > 0.90) agreement in all running gait outcomes. Additionally, temporal outcomes exhibit low mean error (0.01–0.014 s) in left foot outcomes. However, there are some discrepancies in right foot outcomes, due to occlusion. This study demonstrates that the proposed low-cost and markerless system provides accurate running gait assessment outcomes. The approach may help routine running gait assessment in low-resource environments.

Objective . Gait assessments have traditionally been analysed in laboratory settings, but this may not reflect natural gait. Wearable technology may offer an alternative due to its versatility. The purpose of the study was to establish the validity and reliability of temporal gait outcomes calculated by the DANU sports system, against a 3D motion capture reference system. Approach . Forty-one healthy adults (26 M, 15 F, age 36.4 ± 11.8 years) completed a series of overground walking and jogging trials and 60 s treadmill walking and running trials at various speeds (8–14 km hr ⁻¹ ), participants returned for a second testing session to repeat the same testing. Main results . For validity, 1406 steps and 613 trials during overground and across all treadmill trials were analysed respectively. Temporal outcomes generated by the DANU sports system included ground contact time, swing time and stride time all demonstrated excellent agreement compared to the laboratory reference (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > 0.900), aside from ground contact time during overground jogging which had good agreement (ICC = 0.778). For reliability, 666 overground and 511 treadmill trials across all speeds were examined. Test re-test agreement was excellent for all outcomes across treadmill trials (ICC > 0.900), except for swing time during treadmill walking which had good agreement (ICC = 0.886). Overground trials demonstrated moderate to good test re-test agreement (ICC = 0.672–0.750), which may be due to inherent variability of self-selected (rather than treadmill set) pacing between sessions. Significance . Overall, this study showed that temporal gait outcomes from the DANU Sports System had good to excellent validity and moderate to excellent reliability in healthy adults compared to an established laboratory reference.