Search

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the reliability of wearable inertial motion unit (IMU) sensors in measuring spinal range of motion under supervised and unsupervised conditions in both laboratory and ambulatory settings. A secondary aim of the study was to evaluate the reliability of composite IMU metrology scores (IMU-ASMI (Amb)). Forty people with axSpA participated in this clinical measurement study. Participant spinal mobility was assessed by conventional metrology (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index, linear version—BASMILin) and by a wireless IMU sensor-based system which measured lumbar flexion-extension, lateral flexion and rotation. Each sensor-based movement test was converted to a normalized index and used to calculate IMU-ASMI (Amb) scores. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). There was good to excellent agreement for all spinal range of movements (ICC > 0.85) and IMU-ASMI (Amb) scores (ICC > 0.87) across all conditions. Correlations between IMU-ASMI (Amb) scores and conventional metrology were strong (Pearson correlation ≥ 0.85). An IMU sensor-based system is a reliable way of measuring spinal lumbar mobility in axSpA under supervised and unsupervised conditions. While not a replacement for established clinical measures, composite IMU-ASMI (Amb) scores may be reliably used as a proxy measure of spinal mobility.

Portable inertial measurement units (IMUs) are beginning to be used in human motion analysis. These devices can be useful for the evaluation of spinal mobility in individuals with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The objectives of this study were to assess (a) concurrent criterion validity in individuals with axSpA by comparing spinal mobility measured by an IMU sensor-based system vs. optical motion capture as the reference standard; (b) discriminant validity comparing mobility with healthy volunteers; (c) construct validity by comparing mobility results with relevant outcome measures. A total of 70 participants with axSpA and 20 healthy controls were included. Individuals with axSpA completed function and activity questionnaires, and their mobility was measured using conventional metrology for axSpA, an optical motion capture system, and an IMU sensor-based system. The UCOASMI, a metrology index based on measures obtained by motion capture, and the IUCOASMI, the same index using IMU measures, were also calculated. Descriptive and inferential analyses were conducted to show the relationships between outcome measures. There was excellent agreement (ICC > 0.90) between both systems and a significant correlation between the IUCOASMI and conventional metrology (r = 0.91), activity (r = 0.40), function (r = 0.62), quality of life (r = 0.55) and structural change (r = 0.76). This study demonstrates the validity of an IMU system to evaluate spinal mobility in axSpA. These systems are more feasible than optical motion capture systems, and they could be useful in clinical practice.