2D gait analysis of a young woman using Kinovea

Ángela E. Eraso, Dayana A. López, Nicolle Noreña, Eduar S. Reina

angela.eraso@uao.edu.co, dayana.lnpez@uao.edu.co, nicolle.norena@uao.edu.co,
eduar.reina@uao.edu.co
Biomechanics, Automation Department
Universidad Autónoma de Occidente, Cali, Colombia

Abstract - This paper presents the kinematic analysis of gait in
the sagittal plane of a 20-year-old woman without motor
limitations, i.e., within the parameters considered healthy.
Initially, the theoretical framework in which the necessary data to
understand the kinematic analysis of gait, description of the
phases of gait, and parameters to be taken into account when
performing the study will be addressed; a graphic review of the
behavior of the joint angles is also performed, this as an
illustration and comparison tool. A review of the implemented
methodology is made, mentioning how to place the markers
according to the anatomical references and how the data capture
process was carried out. Subsequently, a review of the results and
their analysis is made, in which the data obtained by 2 evaluators
are presented; these data were analyzed using the Salford tool.
Finally, the discussion is carried out in which the comparison with
the literature data and the error generating factors are addressed.
Key words - Gait cycle, anatomical planes, osteokinematics.
I. INTRODUCTION
The study of biomechanics is considered very useful to evaluate
and promote alternatives to certain motor activities, since the
identification and knowledge of the mechanical variables
involved in sports techniques are essential to determine the
tools to measure these variables [2]. Thus, different
measurement techniques make it possible to quantify the
technical quality of the movements of athletes, with which
models or movement patterns have been developed that can be
used in the comparison with other athletes [1].
The above mentioned, has generated interest in studying the
kinematics of this movement, allowing the development of a
considerable number of measuring instruments with which the
observation and data collection of these can be performed,
highlighting that the instrumented gait analysis is considered
the standard tool for the identification of anomalies in it [5].
The interpretation and validity of the results obtained vary
according to the instrument used, and the imaging reference
space; in addition, new gait assessment and analysis tools have
had to be developed due to the impossibility of attending
specialized laboratories because of the COVID-19 pandemic
[8, 9].
However, in order to perform a gait analysis it is also important
to take into account the positioning of the reflective markers, in
as much as this and the number of markers change depending
on the nature of the movement [10]. In the case of sagittal gait,
marker positioning is performed in the lower body area, i.e., at
the ankle and hip joints, which are modeled as hinges and
identified with a marker; furthermore, in Figure 1, it is shown
how markers are used to designate the distal end of the thigh,
and the proximal end of the leg, because rotation and translation
are possible at the knee [10].

On the other hand, human movement and gait have been topics
of interest since ancient times [3], [4]; and this has allowed
defining gait as the basic locomotion activity developed by
humans in their daily life [5], or also as a sequence of
coordinated and alternating movements that allows Fig. 1. Markers used in the ankle, hip and knee for gait measurement and
analysis. [10]
displacement [6]. This process is characterized by the
succession of double support and unipodal support, i.e., during When the markers are positioned, the video of the gait is
walking the support is always on the ground, in constrast with generally taken and analyzed, allowing data to be obtained that
other activities that present aerial phases [7], so it can be facilitate the determination of a basic diagnosis depending on
considered as a permanent forward imbalance. the extension and flexion movement that has occurred in the
hip, knee, and ankle throughout the phases of gait. In the
In gait, even with distortion because of physical disability, it is following figure (2.A) and (2.B), the conventional phases of the
necessary to maintain the reaction forces of the floor on the gait model that are analyzed are illustrated.
supporting limb, and that there is a periodic movement of each
leg from one support position to another, in the direction of
movement [5]. On the other hand, gait disturbances can be
determined when there is not an adequate interaction between
the central nervous system, the skeletal system, and the
muscular system [6].
 TABLE 2. GAIT DIAGNOSIS BASED ON JOINT ANGLE CATEGORIES
[8].

(A)

(B)
Fig. 2. Phases of human gait [8].

It is common to use the gait analysis model presented by B.

Toro, et al., in their article called "The Development and
Validity of the Salford Gait Tool: An Observation-Based
Clinical Gait Assessment Tool", in view of it allows a
classification in categories of the resulting angles for the hip,
knee and ankle joints in the interpretation of gait, taking into
account a reference value of 90° for the hip and ankle, and 180°
for the knee, in a normal gait. Table 1 and 2 show, respectively,
the classification of the angle categories and the suggested
II. METHODOLOGY
diagnosis according to the sum of the categories for each joint.
A simple 2D analysis on the sagittal plane could be
TABLE 1. JOINT ANGLE CLASSIFICATION CATEGORIES IN GAIT successfully used to quantify gait and address specific clinical
ANALYSIS [8]. questions [11 ,12]. A single-camera approach is sufficient for
2D gait description, and allows for a simplified experimental
setup that reduces the space required for equipment, the number
of cameras and associated costs. Video recording in
combination with observational gait assessment scales [13] is
commonly used for visual and qualitative gait analysis.

In this sense, a methodology to quantitatively assess joint

kinematics from video images can provide added value to
academia and patient analysis without additional resources
involved; this makes it necessary for high-speed video-assisted
two-dimensional visual analysis to acquire protocols that
minimize its error and improve its quality.

This section shows the protocol executed during the exercise

under study, therefore, it contemplates the general guidelines
executed from the preparation for data collection to the analysis
of the corresponding results. In this order of ideas, the
Finally, and taking into account the previous concepts, the methodology is divided into 4 principal categories:
objective of this paper is to perform a gait analysis in the
sagittal plane using the analysis software Kinovea ©, from the A. Characterization of the study model
capture and 2D interpretation of a video taken from a test
B. Recording space configuration and instrumentation.
person with known physical characteristics; all this, with the
intention of performing the classification according to B. Toro, C. Image capture procedure.
et. al., of the data obtained, and provide an approximate D. Calibration of the Kinovea frame.
diagnosis about the individual's gait as an application of the E. Obtaining and classifying results
concepts of planar kinematics and the use of technological tools
for biomechanical analysis. A. Characterization of the study model

It is important to consider that the model to be chosen

depends on the object and the variables under study, regardless
of the choice, the objective should be to minimize the error as
much as possible. For this practice case, rectilinear gait was
studied in the low sagittal plane, based on the 2D motion
capture model through videography; this system detects by
colorimetry the pixel or group of pixels with a color different
from the rest [14].
Therefore, it is necessary to pay special attention and
coordinate the type of marker, its size and location, since it
represents the greatest source of variability from one
measurement to another. The location of the markers must be
precise, since the fidelity of the results of the analysis depends
on this, and if the markers are not placed in the correct locations
the software may give erroneous information about the patient's
condition [15].
Four circular markers made of 1 cm diameter laminated
reflective paper were used in the recordings to optimize the
contrast difference and thus optimize marker tracking. These
were placed on the anatomical prominences of interest shown
in Figure 1 to obtain graphs of the spatial location, and
movement of these in each phase or subphase of gait.
A multisegmental model [16] for the right lower extremity,
which is composed of three segments (femur, tibia and foot)
connected by hinges (knee and ankle joint), was used for
marker placement. The position of the following anatomical
landmarks was manually identified as illustrated in figure 2.
Although precise placement of the markers on the skin is
necessary in biomechanical analysis research studies [17]., in
the conditions for this practice it was necessary to place the
markers on top of the subject's clothing. In this case, the use of
tight-fitting clothing was determined to prevent the marker
from moving as little as possible over the chosen anatomical
bone reference.
Fig. 3. Anatomical location of markers.
A. Trochanter major B. Lateral femoral epicondyle
C. Base of the peroneal malleolus
D. Head of the 5th metatarsal
Likewise, it is pertinent to characterize the subject under study,
which, in this case, was a healthy woman informed about the
purpose of the practice who gave her full consent to the use of
the image and the processing of the data. Their body
characteristics of interest are listed below:
• Age: 21 years old
• Height: 162 cm
• Weight: 67.4 kg
• Foot length:
• Left foot: 24.5cm
• Right foot: 25cm
• Background: Cartilage wear in both knees as a result
of previous sports practices: skating and track cycling.
B. Recording space configuration and instrumentation.
The instrumentation within the recording space plays a
fundamental role in obtaining reliable data, since the
characteristics of illumination, distance, recording background,
stability (among others) can significantly change the
performance of the system that computationally processes the
capture, especially in the first stages such as marker detection
and calibration within the data processing. [17]
Some elements considered are:
• Capture space:
Regarding the dimensions of the capture space, it depends
mainly on the type of movement to be surveyed and the
characteristics of the cameras used. In this case, a distance of
12 meters from the center of the camera was maintained,
seeking to reduce the parallax error and considering that the
recording background contrasts with the color of the markers.
• Lighting:
Lighting should preferably be uniform, so as not to generate
shadows that modify the tones of the capturing space. In order
for the data collection to be carried out with optimal lighting, it
was done in an enclosed space with good natural lighting. In
addition, following the recommendations [17] for enclosed
spaces, a light ring with a white spotlight was implemented,
thus reducing the risk of generating specular images on the
objects. The arrangement of the focus depends on the shape of
the capture space, in the application surrounded the camera,
taking care that false positives are generated in the detection of
markers.
• Camera:
For the choice of the type of cameras it is important to take
into account the requirements of the sequences to be surveyed.
Some basic and general variables to be considered are: number
of frames and camera resolution. The number of frames per
second of the video sequences conditions the temporal
resolution of the data processed from these sequences, as well
as limiting the speed of movement to be performed by the
subject if an acceptable capture is sought. [18]
For motion capture, the camera of the iPhone 7 Plus mobile
device was implemented, which has the following technical
specifications for video recording:
• 4K video recording at 30 fps
• 1080p HD video recording at 30 fps or 60 fps
• 720p HD video recording at 30 fps
• Optical image stabilization for video
 • 2x optical zoom; digital zoom up to 6x
(iPhone 7 Plus only)
• Quad-LED True Tone flash
• Slo mo video support for 1080p at 120 fps
and 720p at 240 fps
• Time lapse video with stabilization
• Cinematic video stabilization (1080p and
720p)
• Continuous autofocus video
• Take 8MP still photos while recording 4K
video
• Playback zoom
• Video geotagging
• Video formats recorded: HEVC and H.264
The shot taken has a size of 5.9 MD and its dimensions are
1,784 x 916 pixels. The video resolution is 1080p HD at 30 fps.
Based on the survey of the different databases [18] it can be
stated that 30 frames per second is a normal value to work in
the case of walking, being able to obtain in this case
information of the position of the markers only every 1/30
seconds. It should be borne in mind that if movements of higher
speeds than walking are performed, maintaining the previous
number of frames, the difficulty increases when temporally
linking the data obtained, and the performance of marker
tracking may decrease [19].
Regarding shutter times, these should be quite short so as not
to produce harmful displacement effects when recognizing the
markers. A commonly used rule of thumb for guidance is that
the minimum shooting time that ensures that an image will not
be blurred is the inverse of the focal length. There are also
references that indicate the recommended shutter times
according to the activity to be surveyed. [20]
• 1/4000 s: used for taking sharp pictures of fast-
moving subjects, such as athletes or vehicles,
under good lighting conditions.
• 1/2000 s and 1/1000 s: useful for sharp pictures
of moderately fast-moving subjects, under
normal lighting conditions.
• 1/500 s and 1/250 s: for taking sharp pictures of
moving people in everyday situations. [21]
The following are the conventional values for the ratio of
spatial resolution to camera distance. (They may vary
depending on the instruments)
TABLE 3
SPATIAL RESOLUTION IN CENTIMETERS AS A FUNCTION OF
THE DISTANCE TO THE CENTER OF THE CAMERA
Reference source: Guchin, A., Pereira, G., Ottado, G., & Ramos, M. (2015).
Análisis de video en Biomecánica.
For this reason, in case of using cameras with lower capture
frequency (lower than 120 FPS) and automatic settings, it is
recommended to maximize the face illumination so that the
recording software minimizes the camera shutter time, and
therefore a sharp image is obtained.
If any of these aspects can be modulated, it is recommended to
minimize the shutter time to at least 1/250 s and maximize the
gain to increase the light (albeit artificially) obtaining an image
with good characteristics. (luis)
C. Image capture procedure
Several gait trials were captured from the subject, asking
him to walk naturally without modifying his speed or gait style.
The starting line was set so that the foot in the foreground
could enter the field of view first and touch the ground when
fully visible. Prior to each experimental session, a static
reference image was captured, with the subject in an upright
position, centered in the camera's field of view. The person was
then instructed to walk along a line drawn on the ground, placed
at a known distance from the image plane, identical to the
distance between the camera and the subject during the
acquisition of the static reference image.
To minimize perspective error and the appearance of
shadows, the camera was positioned perpendicular to the plane
of motion to be executed. Taking into account lens distortion
and perspective, the joint in the center of the capture had the
least distortion and perspective error. Likewise, considering
that the analysis is performed on the lower body, the camera
was placed at knee level, assuming a symmetrical error towards
the hip and ankle and focusing maximum precision on the knee.
If we use a lens with a suitable focal length and move far
enough away, the perspective error will be minimal even at the
periphery of the video. In order to measure angles that do not
depend exclusively on the subject, it is recommended that the
camera be oriented in space. For this purpose, a stable tripod
was used to avoid instability in manual recording.
Similarly, from the mobile device screen, an inclinometer or
level was adjusted to calibrate the camera inclination in the
recording plane, auditing that the study subject occupied the
entire image field; for this purpose, the x2 magnification zoom
was used.
The device was located 12 m from the central axis of the
subject and at a height of -- cms from the ground, thanks to a
tripod. In this way, the lower extremities were completely
visible. click here.
D. Calibration of the Kinovea frame.
For the analysis of the gait trials captured with the subject,
the Kinovea software was used, which allowed the frame-by-
frame observation of the video in which the best conditions of
the recording space are evidenced.
In this process, it was necessary to open the selected video
in the analysis software, rectifying that once opened, it could
be viewed without any problem at different speeds and frame
by frame. Once this was done, an analysis method was applied
that allowed, based on the analysis tool of B. Toro, et al. (Ref),
to obtain an approximate diagnosis of the gait of the subject
under study. This method performs the measurement of the
angles of the joints and segments in a cephalocaudal way, that
is, it starts by measuring the angle between a horizontal line
drawn on the subject's hip in the sagittal plane and the markers
A and B (Fig. 3), then the angle formed by the knee between
the segment of the femur and the fibula is measured, and finally
the angle of the ankle generated by the segment of the tibia and
fibula with respect to the foot is measured.
The method explained above was applied for each of the ranges
of motion determined in the analysis tool of B. Toro, et al; in
addition, the analysis of each frame of the video was performed
for each of the three observers. For this purpose, three
computers with the Kinovea program installed were used,
including a desktop computer with a screen resolution and size
of 1440x900 pixels and 48.37 cm (19.04 inches), respectively,
and two laptop computers with a screen resolution and size of
1366x768 pixels and 46.19 cm (18.18 inches), respectively.
On the other hand, the selected frames were calibrated for
perspective using the << perspective grid >> command, setting
the corners of this at the top corners of the video, so as to allow
the crossing perpendicular to the subject's hip of a horizontal
line as a reference for the hip angles.
Finally, in order to improve the accuracy of the placement
of all the vertices of the angles, program marker placement was
performed on the markers taken on video, and a 300% zoom;
in addition, the angles of each range of motion were identified
with a different color.
the hip, so that equation will be necessary to
perform the kinematic analysis (1).
•
𝐻𝑖𝑝 𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 = 90 − (𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑) (1)
• The range of the knee joint is obtained from the
angle formed between segments A-B, and B-C of
the marker distribution. For this work, 180° will be
considered as the angle that evidences the neutral
position of the knee, and therefore, the analysis will
be performed taking into account (2).
𝐾𝑛𝑒𝑒 𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 = 180 − (𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑) (2)
• The angle formed between segments B-C and C-D
is the one that provides information about the range
of the ankle joint, which for this work will be
considered 90° as the neutral position of the ankle,
so it is necessary to make use of to perform the
analysis of this joint. (3)
𝐴𝑛𝑘𝑙𝑒 𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 = 90 − (𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑) (3)
III. RESULTS
The main results obtained during each of the three accepted
measurements are summarized below; the first analysis was
discarded due to errors in the virtual location of the markers,
and will therefore be presented in the discussion section.
A. Gait analysis and rough diagnosis
Under the purpose of obtaining results with the highest
possible reliability, the gait analysis for the study subject was
performed by three different observers, in order to evaluate the
reliability regarding the range of the hip, knee and ankle joints.
TABLE 4.
ANGLES OF THE ANALYSES PERFORMED IN KINOVEA.

It is worth mentioning that each team member performed the

above process and their own analysis independently on
different computers, at different times and places, and were
blinded to each other's results. Each observer carried out two
trials or attempts on non-consecutive days, and when the results
obtained were found to be very similar, one was finally selected
to develop the tables and the corresponding analysis.

E. Obtaining and classifying results

The gait analysis is performed considering that:

• From the horizontal line that crosses the hip in the

sagittal plane and the marker located on the greater
trochanter of the subject's right leg, the angle that
provides information on the articular range of the
hip is formed. Furthermore, in this work, 90° will
Table 4 shows the data on the angles obtained in the kinematic
be considered as the neutral or normal position of
analysis performed by each of the observers; in addition, the
mean of the angles obtained in each joint for each range of
motion that was evaluated is shown. The average of the data
obtained allows to perform a gait analysis with the
characteristic values between the extremes of the data
distribution for each range of motion in the joints.
The result of the analysis performed by the first observer was
called "first analysis", and in this we obtained the frames
shown in the graphic model that you can find by clicking here.
(click here.)
TABLE 5.
RESULTS OF THE FIRST SUBJECT ANALYSIS
With the data in table 5, it can be identified that, in all the
phases of gait, except for the starr double support phase, the hip
was in flexion, since, for this exception, the hip was in
extension. Likewise, the values obtained for the knee indicate
that it was between different ranges of flexion during the entire
gait; and the values for the ankle show that, during all phases
of gait, it was in plantar flexion or plantiflexion.
From the analysis of the values obtained and the assignment
of the categories, it was determined as an approximate
diagnosis that the hip has a range of motion within normal
values, the knee has a mild hyperextension indicating some
knee stiffness, and finally, the subject has a moderate toe
walking.
Now, the result of the analysis performed by the second
observer was called "second analysis", and the graphic model
was also developed for this analysis. (click here).
TABLE 6.
RESULTS OF THE SECOND SUBJECT ANALYSIS.
From the data of this analysis, presented in table 6, it was
found that during the start double support pase, the hip was in
extension, while for each of the other phases, the hip was in
different categories of flexion. For the knee it was evidenced
that since there were no negative values lower than -5, during
all the phases of gait it remained in flexion, showing a great
difference between the reference value and the one obtained
during the toe-off and mid-swing phases. Finally, the ankle was
found to be in different categories of planar flexion throughout
the gait.
With the above, the sum of the categories in the hip allowed
for this analysis to give an approximate diagnosis of mild
extension, related to hip stiffness; also, it was determined that,
for the knee, the approximate diagnosis consisted of mild
hyperextension, related in turn to knee stiffness. For the foot,
the ankle joint range evidenced mild toe walking.
Finally, the analysis performed by the third and last
observer was called "Third analysis", whose graphical model
can be found by clicking here. click here.
In addition, data related to the joint ranges and the
movement category a in which they are located were compiled
in Table #.
TABLE 7.
RESULTS OF THE THIRD ANALYSIS TO THE SUBJECT.
From the data in the table above, it was determined that as
in the previous analyses, the hip during the start double
supporot phase had an extension movement, while in the others
it maintained the flexion movement. On the other hand, the data
collected for the knee indicated that its movements during all
phases of gait were flexion; and the ankle then maintained the
planar flexion found in the previous analyses.
In view of the foregoing, it was determined that the
approximate diagnosis for this analysis consists of movement
within normal ranges for the hip, mild hyperextension of the
knee, again related to stiffness in this joint, and mild toe
walking according to the movement categories obtained in the
table.
Three different gait analyses of the same test subject were
presented, however, it was necessary to determine a diagnosis
in which the data obtained in each of the measurements
performed with the Kinovea software were considered, which
is why, from the determination of the mean of the data for each
gait phase in each joint, a final gait study could be performed,
and is shown in table 8.
In this study, it was determined that the average of all the
data for the hip showed and confirmed that only during the
beginning of the double support this joint was in extension;
likewise, the knee remained in flexion during the entire gait,
and the ankle in planar flexion. According to the above, and
taking into account the sum of the category scores, the
approximate gait diagnosis of the study subject indicates that
there is normal motion at the hip joint, mild hyperextension at
the knee joint, and finally, mild toe walking.
Continuing with the result of the error analysis, the relative
error shown in table 10, and found for each measurement of the
three analyses confirmed that the results of the angles for the
hip joint present errors of lower magnitude than the angles for
the knee and ankle joints.

TABLE 8. It is possible to conclude from the error analysis that, the

RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS WITH THE AVERAGE OF THE DATA
highest percentage of error, and the greatest inaccuracy of the
OBTAINED IN THE PREVIOUS ONES.
measurements was presented in the toe-off and mid-swing
phases for the ankle joint in each of the three analyses
performed.
TABLE 10.
RELATIVE ERRORS OF MEASUREMENTS

B. Statistical analysis of the data

In addition to the results of the analyses, and the diagnoses,

the absolute and relative errors were found for each
measurement. The absolute error is shown in table 9, and the
relative error in table 10.

With table 9 it was determined that the absolute error of

most of the data takes magnitudes that can be considered
relatively low, i.e., that there is inaccuracy in some of the
measurements, but it does not make them unacceptable. In spite
of the above, the ankle measurements showed absolute errors
with greater magnitude, therefore, these measurements with
respect to those of the knee and hip are more inaccurate. TABLE 11.
STANDARD DEVIATION OF DATA OBTAINED
TABLE 9.
ABSOLUTE ERRORS OF THE MEASUREMENTS.
 The standard deviation was determined for the data of each
gait phase resulting from the 3 analyses, finding different
values that give information about the dispersion of the data.
From Table 11 it can be highlighted that the measurements of
initial contact, mid stance, toe off, and mid swing are those
whose standard deviation is higher, therefore, the dispersion
between the angles of the gait phases analyzed for the ankle
joint is much higher compared to the dispersion between angles
for the other joints with respect to their respective mean.
IV. DISCUSSION
In agreement with the author [15], the work team
discovered that during the experimentation process a major
source of error was the incorrect location of the marker (C),
since in the analysis result for this case (click here to observe
the developed models), the results obtained showed the
presence of the pathology: foot drop, which does not exist in
the study subject. However, this event allowed the observers to
recognize the virtue and importance of the calibration or
modification of the virtual markers in the processing software
(Kinovea).
Likewise, it is considered as a possible affectation to the
results that during the capture of the movement the person does
not perform the natural braking, which can affect the balance
of walking. Another option for improvement identified for
future studies is to contemplate a reference measurement in the
recording space, since it would allow complementing the
analysis with the distance traveled, among other adjacent
variables.
It should be noted that other causes of error that could be
appreciated during data capture and analysis are: the
predisposition of the subject of study with respect to the
exercise of walking; it is essential to record at least 3 times to
avoid capturing the most natural form possible.
Similarly, the movement of the soft tissue in the person
should also be considered as a possible alteration, since it can
destabilize the established markers, or move them.
Regarding the results obtained, it is important to consider that,
in the gait analysis for the hip joint, three results were obtained
in which it was homogeneously evidenced that during the
double stance initiation phase this joint is in extension; this
result is due to the fact that during the start double support
phase both feet are again in contact with the ground, and during
this period the joint is in extension (of the reference limb) as
the body weight is distributed beyond the supporting foot. It is
normal to find at the end of this process approximately 10
degrees of hip hyperextension, since the joint structures present
a stretch considered as maximum due to the fact that the body
weight begins to fall on the other lower extremity [22]; in
addition, during the other phases it is normal to find flexion or
the progressive decrease of the flexion angle as a characteristic
of normal hip movement [22].
At the same time, the knee joint showed in its analysis and
diagnosis a mild hyperextension, despite the fact that during the
gait phases the resulting angles for the range of this joint
indicated that this joint was always in flexion. Mild
hyperextension of the knee in this case was determined by the
sum of the categories, and may mean that the study subject
belongs to the group of people who can perform negative
flexion (hyperextension) up to -5° without representing a major
gait abnormality [23]. Full knee extension optimizes stability
and the way in which body weight support is performed [23].
According to the results, the ankle joint in all the analyses
performed presented a common diagnosis of mild toe walking,
this type of diagnosis may mean that idiopathically, the subject
performs this toe walking for reasons related to an increased
plantar flexion of the ankle during stance and swing phases, or
a hyperextension of the knee marked especially in the stance
phase, or a sudden plantar flexion in mid-swing [24].
However, due to the conditions of the subject, this diagnosis
may be more related to the large absolute error found for the
ankle measurements, generated in turn by the inaccuracy of the
angles taken at this joint because in the gait video, the markers
of the base of the peroneal malleolus and the head of the fifth
metatarsal were scattered and the part of the foot was lost
because the movement of the foot was must have been faster
than the capture speed of the instrument used.
V. CONCLUSIONS
It is evident that kinematic gait analysis is a clinical tool that
supports the diagnosis of different motor disorders.
Additionally, it is a relatively simple method to perform and
does not require invasive or imaging methods that may increase
its costs (in general cases).
It is also found that it is of utmost importance to have the proper
knowledge to fix the markers, as this can generate errors in the
measurement and consequently a bad analysis.
When processing the information, it is found that the joint
rotation angles must be organized taking into account the
anatomical planes and the type of movement present in the
joint, which is done with the aim of being able to categorize
with the Salford's method tool.
Finally, it has been found that there are different methods to
perform the measurement and analysis, as well as the
consideration of some stages of the march; therefore, the
challenge that engineering can assume could be the
development of standard technologies and methodologies,
which additionally have reference data.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] P. P. Soriano y S. L. Belloch, «LA INTRUMENTACIÓN EN LA
BIOMECÁNICA DEPORTIVA,» Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, vol.
2, nº 2, p. 17, 2007
[2] A. Gorcío-Fojedo, F. Biosco y J. C. Valios, «LA BIOMECÁNICA: UNA
HERRAMIENTA PARA LA EVALUACIÓN DE LA TÉCNICA
DEPORTIVA,» apunts, Educacion fisica y deportes, vol. 1, nº 47, pp. 15-20,
1997.
[3] J. Paul, «History and fundamentals of gait analysis,» Bio-Medical Materials
and Engineering, vol. 8, nº 3-4, pp. 123-135, 1998.
[4] S. Collado-Vasquez, «La marcha: historia de los procedimientos de análisis.
Biociencias,» Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, vol. 2, nº 1, pp.
1-15, 2004.
[5] L. E. Contreras, J. A. Tristancho y L. F. Vargas, «Análisis Biomecánico de
Marcha Humana a Través de Técnicas de Modelaje,» Entre Ciencia e
Ingeniería, vol. 6, nº 12, pp. 29-35, 2012.
[6] M. HARO, «LABORATORIO DE ANÁLISIS DE MARCHA Y
MOVIMIENTO,» Revista Medica Clinica Condes, vol. 25, nº 2, pp. 237-247,
2014.
[7] C. Marco Sanz, «CINESIOLOGIA DE LA MARCHA HUMANA
NORMAL,» 2005.
[8] B. Toro, C. J. Nester y P. C. Farren, «The Development and Validity of the
Salford Gait Tool: An Observation-Based Clinical Gait Assessment Tool,»
Arch Phys Med Rehabil, vol. 88, nº 1, pp. 321-328, 2007.
[9] B. Toro, C. Nester y P. Farren, «The status of gait assessment,» Arch Phys
Med Rehabil, vol. 84, nº 1, pp. 878-884, 2003.
[10] D. G. E. Robertson, G. E. Caldwell, J. Hamill, G. Kamen y S. N.
Whittlesey, «Planar Kinematics,» de Research Methods in Biomechanics,
Massachussets, 2004, pp. 9-36
[11] A. Harvey and J. W. Gorter, “Video gait analysis for ambulatory children
with cerebral palsy: why, when, where and how!” Gait & Posture, vol. 33, no.
3, pp. 501–503, 2011.
[12] U. C. Ugbolue, E. Papi, K. T. Kaliarntas et al., “The evaluation of an
inexpensive, 2D, video-based gait assessment system for clinical use,” Gait &
Posture, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 483–489, 2013.
[13] Meunier, P., & Yin, S. (2000). Performance of a 2D image-based
anthropometric measurement and clothing sizing system. Applied ergonomics,
31(5), 445-451.
[14] L. Roche. S, “Enfoque metodológico para el análisis 2D de vídeo en la
carrera” Journal Internacional de deportes colectivos, 30, 69-32
[15] Adam G Kirk, James F O’Brien, and David A Forsyth. Skeletal parameter
estimation from optical motion capture data. In Computer Vision and Pattern
Recognition, 2005. CVPR 2005. IEEE Computer Society Conference on,
volume 2, pages 782–788. IEEE, 2005.
[16] C. J. Veenman, M.J.T. Reinders, and E. Backer. Resolving motion
correspondence for densely moving points. IEEE Transactions on Pattern
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 23:54–72, 2001
[17] R. Baker. Introduction to the Conventional Gait Model. U. Salford,
Manchester
[18] Guchin, A., Pereira, G., Ottado, G., & Ramos, M. (2015). Análisis de
video en Biomecánica.
[19] C. J. Veenman, M.J.T. Reinders, and E. Backer. Resolving motion
correspondence for densely moving points. IEEE Transactions on Pattern
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 23:54–72, 2001
[20] Adam G Kirk, James F O’Brien, and David A Forsyth. Skeletal
parameter estimation from optical motion capture data. In Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, 2005. CVPR 2005. IEEE Computer Society Conference
on, volume 2, pages 782–788. IEEE, 2005.
[21] Guchin, A., Pereira, G., Ottado, G., & Ramos, M. (2015). Análisis de
video en Biomecánica.
[22] J. Perry, M.D. Normal Gait. Atlas of Limb Prosthetics: Surgical,
Prosthetic, and Rehabilitation Principles. Chapter 13. Digital Resource
Foundation. Available at: http://www.oandplibrary.org/alp/chap13-
01.asp#:~:text=Hip.,in%2030%20degrees%20of%20flexion.&text=Then%20
flexion%20begins%20in%20terminal,continues%20through%20most%20of%
20swing
[23] L. M. Silva., N. Stergiou. (2020) The basics of gait analysis. Biomechanics
and Gait Analysis. Chapter 7, pp. 225-250.
[24] J. Edinger, A. Sinha, M. Fisher. (2019) Congenital and Acquired
Disorders. Atlas of Ortheses and Assistive Devices. 5th Ed, pp. 303-312.e3.