Comparison of Laboratory and Daily-Life Gait Speed Assessment during ON and OFF States in Parkinson's Disease.

Accurate assessment of Parkinson's disease (PD) ON and OFF states in the usual environment is essential for tailoring optimal treatments. Wearables facilitate measurements of gait in novel and unsupervised environments; however, differences between unsupervised and in-laboratory measures have been reported in PD. We aimed to investigate whether unsupervised gait speed discriminates medication states and which supervised tests most accurately represent home performance. In-lab gait speeds from different gait tasks were compared to home speeds of 27 PD patients at ON and OFF states using inertial sensors. Daily gait speed distribution was expressed in percentiles and walking bout (WB) length. Gait speeds differentiated ON and OFF states in the lab and the home. When comparing lab with home performance, ON assessments in the lab showed moderate-to-high correlations with faster gait speeds in unsupervised environment (r = 0.69; p < 0.001), associated with long WB. OFF gait assessments in the lab showed moderate correlation values with slow gait speeds during OFF state at home (r = 0.56; p = 0.004), associated with short WB. In-lab and daily assessments of gait speed with wearables capture additional integrative aspects of PD, reflecting different aspects of mobility. Unsupervised assessment using wearables adds complementary information to the clinical assessment of motor fluctuations in PD.

Toward a Remote Assessment of Walking Bout and Speed: Application in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis.

Gait speed as a powerful biomarker of mobility is mostly assessed in controlled environments, e.g. in the clinic. With wearable inertial sensors, gait speed can be estimated in an objective manner. However, most of the previous works have validated the gait speed estimation algorithms in clinical settings which can be different than the home assessments in which the patients demonstrate their actual performance. Moreover, to provide comfort for the users, devising an algorithm based on a single sensor setup is essential. To this end, the goal of this study was to develop and validate a new gait speed estimation method based on a machine learning approach to predict gait speed in both clinical and home assessments by a sensor on the lower back. Moreover, two methods were introduced to detect walking bouts during daily activities at home. We have validated the algorithms in 35 patients with multiple sclerosis as it often presents with mobility difficulties. Therefore, the robustness of the algorithm can be shown in an impaired or slow gait. Against silver standard multi-sensor references, we achieved a bias close to zero and a precision of 0.15 m/s for gait speed estimation. Furthermore, the proposed machine learning-based locomotion detection method had a median of 96.8% specificity, 93.0% sensitivity, 96.4% accuracy, and 78.6% F1-score in detecting walking bouts at home. The high performance of the proposed algorithm showed the feasibility of the unsupervised mobility assessment introduced in this study.

Long-term unsupervised mobility assessment in movement disorders.

Mobile health technologies (wearable, portable, body-fixed sensors, or domestic-integrated devices) that quantify mobility in unsupervised, daily living environments are emerging as complementary clinical assessments. Data collected in these ecologically valid, patient-relevant settings can overcome limitations of conventional clinical assessments, as they capture fluctuating and rare events. These data could support clinical decision making and could also serve as outcomes in clinical trials. However, studies that directly compared assessments made in unsupervised and supervised (eg, in the laboratory or hospital) settings point to large disparities, even in the same parameters of mobility. These differences appear to be affected by psychological, physiological, cognitive, environmental, and technical factors, and by the types of mobilities and diagnoses assessed. To facilitate the successful adaptation of the unsupervised assessment of mobility into clinical practice and clinical trials, clinicians and researchers should consider these disparities and the multiple factors that contribute to them.