Evaluation of inertial measurement units as a novel method for kinematic gait evaluation in dogs

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objective: To evaluate the use of inertial measurement units (IMU) for quantification of canine limb kinematics.

Methods: Sixteen clinically healthy, medium-sized dogs were enrolled. Baseline kinematic data were acquired using an optical motion capture system. Following this baseline data acquisition, a harness system was used for attachment of IMU to the animals. Optical kinematic data of dogs with and without the harness were compared to evaluate the influence of the harness on gait parameters. Sagittal plane joint kinematics acquired simultaneously with IMU and the optical system were compared for the carpal, tarsal, stifle and hip joints. Comparisons of data were made using the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) test and evaluation of root mean squared errors (RMSE).

Results: No significant differences were demonstrated in stance duration, swing duration or stride length between dogs instrumented with or without the harness, however, mean RMSE values ranged from 4.90° to 14.10° across the various joints. When comparing simultaneously acquired optical and IMU kinematic data, strong correlations were found for all four joints evaluated (CCC: carpus = 0.98, hock = 0.95, stifle = 0.98, hip = 0.96) and median RMSE values were similar across the joints ranging from 2.51° to 3.52°.

Conclusions and Clinical relevance: Canine sagittal plane motion data acquisition with IMU is feasible, and optically acquired and IMU acquired sagittal plane kinematics had good correlation. This technology allows data acquisition outside the gait laboratory and may provide an alternative to optical kinematic gait analysis for the carpal, tarsal, stifle, and hip joints in the dog. Further investigation into this technology is indicated.

^* ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0456-1086

• References

• 1 Waxman AS, Robinson DA, Evans RB. et al. Relationship between objective and subjective assessment of limb function in normal dogs with an experimentally induced lameness. Vet Surg 2008; 37: 241-246.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Gillette RL, Angle TC. Recent developments in canine locomotor analysis: a review. Vet J 2008; 178: 165-176.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Evans R, Horstman C, Conzemius M. Accuracy and optimization of force platform gait analysis in Labradors with cranial cruciate disease evaluated at a walking gait. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 445-449.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Agostinho FS, Rahal SC, Miqueleto NS. et al. Kinematic analysis of Labrador Retrievers and Rottweilers trotting on a treadmill. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 185-191.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Bockstahler BA, Henninger W, Muller M. et al. Influence of borderline hip dysplasia on joint kinematics of clinically sound Belgian Shepherd dogs. Am J Vet Res 2007; 68: 271-276.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 DeCamp CE. Kinetic and kinematic gait analysis and the assessment of lameness in the dog. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1997; 27: 825-840.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Caron A, Fitzpatrick N, Caley A. et al. Kinematic gait analysis of the canine thoracic limb using a six degrees of freedom marker set. Study in normal Labrador Retrievers and Labrador Retrievers with medial coronoid process disease. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2014; 27: 461-469.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Colborne GR, Walker AM, Tattersall AJ. et al. Effect of trotting velocity on work patterns of the hind limbs of Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67: 1293-1298.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Evans R, Gordon W, Conzemius M. Effect of velocity on ground reaction forces in dogs with lameness attributable to tearing of the cranial cruciate ligament. Am J Vet Res 2003; 64: 1479-1481.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Kim SY, Kim JY, Hayashi K. et al. Skin movement during the kinematic analysis of the canine pelvic limb. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 326-332.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Diaz SF, Torres SM, Nogueira SA. et al. The impact of body site, topical melatonin and brushing on hair regrowth after clipping normal Siberian Husky dogs. Vet Dermatol 2006; 17: 45-50.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Zhang J-T, Novak AC, Brouwer B. et al. Concurrent validation of Xsens MVN measurement of lower limb joint angular kinematics. Physiol Meas 2013; 34: N63.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Cooper G, Sheret I, McMillan L. et al. Inertial sensor-based knee flexion/extension angle estimation. J Biomech 2009; 42: 2678-2685.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Reininga IH, Stevens M, Wagenmakers R. et al. Compensatory trunk movements in patients with hip osteoarthritis: accuracy and reproducibility of a body-fixed sensor-based assessment. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 90: 681-687.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Supej M. 3D measurements of alpine skiing with an inertial sensor motion capture suit and GNSS RTK system. J Sports Sci 2010; 28: 759-769.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Bergamini E, Guillon P, Camomilla V. et al. Trunk inclination estimate during the sprint start using an inertial measurement unit: A Validation Study. J Appl Biomech 2012; 29: 622-627.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Pfau T, Witte TH, Wilson AM. Centre of mass movement and mechanical energy fluctuation during gallop locomotion in the Thoroughbred racehorse. J Exp Biol 2006; 209: 3742-3757.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Moorman VJ, Reiser RF, McIlwraith CW. et al. Validation of an equine inertial measurement unit system in clinically normal horses during walking and trotting. Am J Vet Res 2012; 73: 1160-1170.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Keegan KG, Kramer J, Yonezawa Y. et al. Assessment of repeatability of a wireless, inertial sensor-based lameness evaluation system for horses. Am J Vet Res 2011; 72: 1156-1163.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Pfau T, Robilliard JJ, Weller R. et al. Assessment of mild hindlimb lameness during over ground locomotion using linear discriminant analysis of inertial sensor data. Equine Vet J 2007; 39: 407-413.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Warner SM, Koch TO, Pfau T. Inertial sensors for assessment of back movement in horses during locomotion over ground. Equine Vet J 2010; 42 (Suppl. 38) 417-424.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 van den Noort JC, Ferrari A, Cutti AG. et al. Gait analysis in children with cerebral palsy via inertial and magnetic sensors. Med Biol Eng Comput 2012; 51: 377-386.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Favre J, Aissaoui R, Jolles BM. et al. Functional calibration procedure for 3D knee joint angle description using inertial sensors. J Biomech 2009; 42: 2330-2335.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 DeCamp CE, Soutas-Little RW, Hauptman J. et al. Kinematic gait analysis of the trot in healthy greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54: 627-634.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Hottinger HA, DeCamp CE, Olivier NB. et al. Noninvasive kinematic analysis of the walk in healthy large-breed dogs. Am J Vet Res 1996; 57: 381-388.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Kobrick RL, Carr CE, Meyen F. et al. Using inertial measurement units for measuring spacesuit mobility and work envelope capability for intravehicular and extravehicular activities. 63^rd International Astronautical Congress 2012 October 1-5; Naples, Italy IAC-12-A1.6.6: 383-391; available at: http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/people/dnewman/pdf2/IAC_draftOct2012_v7.pdf
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Holler PJ, Brazda V, Dal-Bianco B. et al. Kinematic motion analysis of the joints of the forelimbs and hind limbs of dogs during walking exercise regimens. Am J Vet Res 2010; 71: 734-740.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Moorman VJ, Reiser RF, Mahaffey CA. et al. Use of an inertial measurement unit to assess the effect of forelimb lameness on three-dimensional hoof orientation in horses at a walk and trot. Am J Vet Res 2014; 75: 800-808.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Pfau T, Witte TH, Wilson AM. A method for deriving displacement data during cyclical movement using an inertial sensor. J Exp Biol 2005; 208: 2503-2514.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Ramon T, Prades M, Armengou L. et al. Effects of athletic taping of the fetlock on distal limb mechanics. Equine Vet J 2004; 36: 764-768.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Clayton HM, Lavagnino M, Kaiser LJ. et al. Evaluation of biomechanical effects of four stimulation devices placed on the hind feet of trotting horses. Am J Vet Res 2011; 72: 1489-1495.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Ragetly CA, Griffon DJ, Mostafa AA. et al. Inverse dynamics analysis of the pelvic limbs in Labrador Retrievers with and without cranial cruciate ligament disease. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 513-522.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 DeCamp CE, Riggs CM, Olivier NB. et al. Kinematic evaluation of gait in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture. Am J Vet Res 1996; 57: 120-126.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Sanchez-Bustinduy M, de Medeiros MA, Radke H. et al. Comparison of kinematic variables in defining lameness caused by naturally occurring rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 523-530.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 de Medeiros M, Sanchez Bustinduy M, Radke H. et al. Early kinematic outcome after treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture by tibial plateau levelling osteotomy in the dog. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 178-184.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Headrick JF, Zhang S, Millard RP. et al. Use of an inverse dynamics method to compare the three-dimensional motion of the pelvic limb among clinically normal dogs and dogs with cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle joints following tibial plateau leveling osteotomy or lateral fabellar-tibial suture stabilization. Am J Vet Res 2014; 75: 554-564.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Marsolais GS, McLean S, Derrick T. et al. Kinematic analysis of the hind limb during swimming and walking in healthy dogs and dogs with surgically corrected cranial cruciate ligament rupture. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003; 222: 739-743.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Benoit DL, Ramsey DK, Lamontagne M. et al. Effect of skin movement artifact on knee kinematics during gait and cutting motions measured in vivo. Gait Posture 2006; 24: 152-164.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Tashman S, Anderst W. In-vivo measurement of dynamic joint motion using high speed biplane radiography and CT: application to canine ACL deficiency. J Biomech Eng 2003; 125: 238-245.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 McLaughlin Jr RM , Roush JK. Effects of subject stance time and velocity on ground reaction forces in clinically normal greyhounds at the trot. Am J Vet Res 1994; 55: 1666-1671.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar