Gait and jump anomalies are often used as indicators to identify the presence and state of disorders that involve motor symptoms. Physical tests are often performed in specialized laboratories, which offer reliable and accurate results, but require long and costly analyses performed by specialized personnel. The use of inertial sensors for gait and jump evaluation offers an easy-to-use low-cost alternative, potentially applicable by the patients themselves at home. In this paper, we compared three inertial measurement units that are available on the market by means of well-known standardized tests for the evaluation of gait and jump behavior. The aim of the study was to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each of the tested sensors, considered in different tests, by comparing data collected on two healthy subjects. Data were processed to identify the phases of the movement and the possible inaccuracies of each sensor. The analysis showed that some of the considered inertial units could be reliably used to identify the gait and jump phases and could be employed to detect anomalies, potentially suggesting the presence of disorders.
Comparative evaluation of a low‐cost solar powered otoscope with a traditional device among health care workers in Malawi