Skip to main content

Table 2 Mean values and standard deviation for gait parameters under single task condition (Mean ± SD), and intra-class correlation (ICC), inter-trial reliability (SEM; SEM%) and sensitivity to change (MDC95, MDC95%) for these gait parameters across measurement systems

From: An interrater reliability study of gait analysis systems with the dual task paradigm in healthy young and older adults

Parameter

GaitUp Mean (SD)

Opto-Gait Mean (SD)

GAIT-rite Mean (SD)

Zebris Mean (SD)

Mobility Lab Mean (SD)

ICCc (95% CI)

ICCa (95% CI)

SEM (SEM%)

MDC95 (MDC95%)

ANOVA

velocity (m/s) YA

1.47 (0.19)

1.45 (0.19)

1.48 (0.19)

1.44 (0.24)

1.36 (0.19)

0.99 (0.98–0.99)

0.98 (0.93–0.99)

0.02 (1.26)

0.05 (3.49)

F(4,9) = 21.9***

velocity (m/s) OA

1.23 (0.19)

1.23 (0.20)

1.24 (0.19)

1.19 (0.22)

1.10 (0.19)

0.87 (0.69–0.96)

0.86 (0.68–0.95)

0.08 (6.43)

0.21 (17.8)

F(4,11) = 1.39ns

cadence (steps/s) YA

111.8 (9.68)

111.5 (9.97)

112.1 (9.35)

117.1 (19.66)

111.6 (9.73)

0.96 (0.91–0.99)

0.96 (0.89–0.98)

2.24 (1.99)

6.22 (5.51)

F(4,9) = 2.29T

cadence (steps/s) OA

106.9 (9.21)

106.6 (9.86)

107.5 (8.75)

106.3 (12.18)

105.6 (9.42)

0.99 (0.98–0.99)

0.99 (0.98–0.99)

0.82 (0.77)

2.28 (2.14)

F(4,11) = 1.69ns

stride length (m) YA

1.56 (0.09)

1.56 (0.09)

1.58 (0.10)

1.49 (0.04)

1.44 (0.13)

0.95 (0.88–0.97)

0.88 (0.62–0.97)

0.02 (1.27)

0.05 (3.51)

F(4,9) = 18.1***

stride length (m) OA

1.37 (0.16)

1.37 (0.16)

1.38 (0.16)

1.35 (0.15)

1.25 (0.14)

0.99 (0.98–0.99)

0.96 (0.84–0.99)

0.02 (1.12)

0.04 (3.11)

F(4,11) = 34.4***

single limb support (%GCT) YA

82.9 (3.01)

75.1 (2.45)

75.9 (2.59)

86.7 (2.07)

82.1 (1.73)

0.71 (0.27–0.92)

0.26 (−0.01–0.64

0.89 (1.09)

2.45 (3.05)

F(4,9) = 61.9***

single limb support (%GCT) OA

79.9 (2.33)

73.3 (2.57)

73.5 (2.19)

85.4 (1.32)

79.1 (2.93)

0.81 (0.57–0.94)

0.31 (0.02–0.66)

0.76 (0.98)

2.11 (2.69)

F(4,11) = 105.6***

double limb support (%GCT) YA

17.0 (3.01)

24.9 (2.45)

24.0 (2.59)

13.3 (2.07)

17.7 (1.88)

0.73 (0.33–0.92)

0.27 (−0.01–0.66)

0.88 (4.52)

2.43 (12.5)

F(4,9) = 63.4***

double limb support (%GCT) OA

20.1 (2.33)

26.7 (2.57)

26.5 (2.19)

14.6 (1.32)

20.9 (2.93)

0.81 (0.56–0.94)

0.31 (0.02–0.66)

0.76 (3.51)

2.12 (9.72)

F(4,11) = 104.9***

stance (%GCT) YA

58.4 (1.39)

62.5 (1.27)

61.9 (1.29)

66.7 (4.19)

58.8 (1.06)

−7.49 (−20.2–1.41)§

−0.45 (−0.54–0.16)§

1.08 (1.75)

2.99 (4.85)

F(4,9) = 19.5***

stance (%GCT) OA

60.2 (1.23)

63.5 (1.36)

63.2 (1.09)

65.1 (2.08)

60.4 (1.35)

0.82 (0.59–0.94)

0.46 (0.07–0.79)

0.47 (0.76)

1.31 (2.09)

F(4,11) = 49.3***

  1. YA Young adults, OA Older adults, GTC Gait cycle time, ICC Intra-class-correlation, A absolute agreement, C consistency, 95% CI 95% confidence interval; §The Tukey Additivity Test shows a significant interaction effect between the systems and the persons being assessed, which contradicts the requirements for the ICC analysis. An interpretation is not possible due to a possible under- or overestimation and since reliability measures are by definition limited to a value range from 0 to 1, negative ICCs indicate a reliability of 0 [46]; SEM Standard error of measurement, mdc minimal detectable change. In order to be able to compare both measures, they were additionally expressed as percentages (SEM% and MDC95%). ANOVA to calculate the differences between the measurement systems: T Tendency, ns Not significant, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Back to article page

European Review of Aging and Physical Activity

ISSN: 1861-6909

Contact us