Back

Research report : CERITER Clinical study - Stride One

Meyer, S.; Limet, J.; Stevens, P.; Michielsen, M.

2024-09-04 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.1101/2024.09.04.24312478 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveThis study investigates the short-term impact of the use of Ceriter Stride One on the quality of gait in patients rehabilitating after a cerebrovascular accident (CVA). Stride One is a smart insole that provides real-time audio feedback (cues) to the patient when performing a certain exercise. The goal of Stride One is to allow patients to practice walking more intensively and with higher quality during rehabilitation. MethodTen patients were offered therapy using Stride One for one week. The quality of the gait pattern was evaluated at the beginning and at the end of the week, with and without the use of Stride One. An additional evaluation was performed three to four days after the end of therapy without the use of Stride One. One patient was unable to complete the therapy due to a fall. ResultsBoth therapist and patient reported an improvement in the quality of the foot roll-off pattern in 100% of cases. This improvement was also objectively determined in the data measured by Stride One, with an average of 8% improvement on Stride One general quality parameter, and an average of 25% improvement on Stride One specific quality parameter for the specific patient. Furthermore, 89% of patients indicate that using Stride One helps them to understand their physiotherapist better, and 67% of patients indicate that they can practice more and better with Stride One. ConclusionPracticing one week with Stride One generates a positive clinical impact on the gait pattern. A lasting improvement in the gait pattern without using Stride One, three to four days after the intervention, could not be demonstrated in this short time period. Further research is needed to evaluate the effect of Stride One after more long-term use. Additional research questions are suggested.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.