Exploration and comparison of the pre-impact lead time of active and passive falls based on inertial sensors.

ABSTRACT

Research on falls in elderly people has a great social significance because of the rapidly growing of the aging population. The pre-impact lead time of fall (PLT) is an important part of the human fall theory. PLT is the longest time for a person who is going to fall to take action in order to prevent the fall or to reduce bodily injuries from the fall impact. However, there is no clear definition of PLT so far. There is also no comparative study for active and passive falls. In this study, we proposed a theoretical definition of the PLT, based on a new method of fall event division. We also compared the differences of PLT and the related angles between active and passive falls. Eight healthy adult subjects were arranged to perform three kinds of activities of daily living (sitting, walking and lying), and two kinds fall activities (active and passive) in three directions (forward, backward and lateral fall). Nine inertial sensor modules were used to measure the body segmental kinematic characteristics of each subject in our experimental activities. In this paper, a fall event was suggested to divide into three or four phases and then the critical phase could be divided into three periods (pre-impact, impact, and post-impact). Two fall models were developed for active and passive falls using acceleration data. The average value of PLT for active falls is about 514 ± 112 ms and it is smaller than the value for passive falls, which is 731 ± 104 ms. The longest PLTs were measured on the chest or waist instead of other locations, such as the thigh and shank. The PLTs of the three kinds of fall activities were slightly different, but there was a significant difference between two fall modes. The PLT showed the correlation to the body angle at the start of PLT, but it was uncorrelated at the end of PLT. The angles at the start of PLT had slight variations (<10 degrees) from the steady standing state except in passive forward falls (max 16 degrees) due to the self-control. The landing angles were significantly different in the both fall modes in all the three directions of fall, indicating the state of the trunk was uncertain when the hip contacted the ground. It can be concluded that it is feasible to prevent falls by using an early pre-impact fall alarm device; the present study provides important reference for development of pre-impact fall alarm devices.