Phys. Ther. Korea 2023; 30(2): 102-109
Published online May 20, 2023
https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2023.30.2.102
© Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy
Junwoo Park , PT, BPT, Jongwon Choi
, PT, BPT, Seyoung Lee
, PT, BPT, Kitaek Lim
, PT, PhD, Woochol Joseph Choi
, PT, PhD
Injury Prevention and Biomechanics Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Yonsei University, Wonju, Korea
Correspondence to: Woochol Joseph Choi
E-mail: wcjchoi@yonsei.ac.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6623-3806
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background: While efforts have been made to differentiate fall risk in older adults using wearable devices and clinical methodologies, technologies are still infancy. We applied a decision tree (DT) algorithm using inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor data and clinical measurements to generate high performance classification models of fall risk of older adults. Objects: This study aims to develop a classification model of fall risk using IMU data and clinical measurements in older adults.
Methods: Twenty-six older adults were assessed and categorized into high and low fall risk groups. IMU sensor data were obtained while walking from each group, and features were extracted to be used for a DT algorithm with the Gini index (DT1) and the Entropy index (DT2), which generated classification models to differentiate high and low fall risk groups. Model’s performance was compared and presented with accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.
Results: Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were 77.8%, 80.0%, and 66.7%, respectively, for DT1; and 72.2%, 91.7%, and 33.3%, respectively, for DT2.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that the fall risk classification using IMU sensor data obtained during gait has potentials to be developed for practical use. Different machine learning techniques involving larger data set should be warranted for future research and development.
Keywords: Classification, Decision tree, Fall risk, Gait, Inertial measurement unit sensor
Phys. Ther. Korea 2023; 30(2): 102-109
Published online May 20, 2023 https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2023.30.2.102
Copyright © Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy.
Junwoo Park , PT, BPT, Jongwon Choi
, PT, BPT, Seyoung Lee
, PT, BPT, Kitaek Lim
, PT, PhD, Woochol Joseph Choi
, PT, PhD
Injury Prevention and Biomechanics Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Yonsei University, Wonju, Korea
Correspondence to:Woochol Joseph Choi
E-mail: wcjchoi@yonsei.ac.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6623-3806
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background: While efforts have been made to differentiate fall risk in older adults using wearable devices and clinical methodologies, technologies are still infancy. We applied a decision tree (DT) algorithm using inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor data and clinical measurements to generate high performance classification models of fall risk of older adults. Objects: This study aims to develop a classification model of fall risk using IMU data and clinical measurements in older adults.
Methods: Twenty-six older adults were assessed and categorized into high and low fall risk groups. IMU sensor data were obtained while walking from each group, and features were extracted to be used for a DT algorithm with the Gini index (DT1) and the Entropy index (DT2), which generated classification models to differentiate high and low fall risk groups. Model’s performance was compared and presented with accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.
Results: Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were 77.8%, 80.0%, and 66.7%, respectively, for DT1; and 72.2%, 91.7%, and 33.3%, respectively, for DT2.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that the fall risk classification using IMU sensor data obtained during gait has potentials to be developed for practical use. Different machine learning techniques involving larger data set should be warranted for future research and development.
Keywords: Classification, Decision tree, Fall risk, Gait, Inertial measurement unit sensor
Table 1 . Clinical measurements of each group.
Variable | High fall risk | Low fall risk |
---|---|---|
Height (cm) | 156.1 ± 7.3 | 152.3 ± 4.6 |
Weight (kg) | 58.4 ± 7.2 | 56.7 ± 8.0 |
Age (y) | 79.1 ± 5.1 | 80.9 ± 8.1 |
S-PPA | 4.2 ± 1.7 | 2.6 ± 1.9 |
Muscle mass (kg) | 21.0 ± 3.2 | 19.5 ± 2.4 |
Left hand grip strength (kg) | 19.2 ± 4.1 | 20.5 ± 4.2 |
Right hand grip strength (kg) | 19.5 ± 6.0 | 21.2 ± 4.9 |
BBS | 50.3 ± 4.1 | 51.0 ± 3.8 |
TUG (s) | 13.1 ± 3.7 | 10.8 ± 2.6 |
5STS (s) | 10.6 ± 3.3 | 11.4 ± 2.6 |
FES-I | 23.3 ± 9.7 | 20.8 ± 3.9 |
Fear of fall | 2.4 ± 1.3 | 2.9 ± 1.6 |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation. S-PPA, Short-form Physiological Profile Assessment; BBS, Berg Balance Scale; TUG, Timed Up and Go; 5STS, five times sit to stand; FES-I, Fall Efficacy Scale-International..
Table 2 . Classification performance of decision tree using DT1 and DT2.
Variable | DT1 | DT2 |
---|---|---|
Accuracy (%) | 77.8 | 72.2 |
Sensitivity (%) | 80.0 | 91.7 |
Specificity (%) | 66.7 | 33.3 |
DT1, Gini index; DT2, Entropy index..