Assessing Gait & Balance in Adults with Mild Balance Impairment: G&B App Reliability and Validity
Authors: Shafi Hina , Awan Waqar Ahmed , Olsen Sharon , Siddiqi Furqan Ahmed , Tassadaq Naureen , Rashid Usman , Niazi Imran Khan 
Published: December 2023

Smartphone applications (apps) that utilize embedded inertial sensors have the potential to provide valid and reliable estimations of different balance and gait parameters in older adults with mild balance impairment. This study aimed to assess the reliability, validity, and sensitivity of the Gait&Balance smartphone application (G&B App) for measuring gait and balance in a sample of middle- to older-aged adults with mild balance impairment in Pakistan. Community-dwelling adults over 50 years of age (N = 83, 50 female, range 50–75 years) with a Berg Balance Scale (BBS) score between 46/56 and 54/56 were included in the study. Data collection involved securing a smartphone to the participant’s lumbosacral spine. Participants performed six standardized balance tasks, including four quiet stance tasks and two gait tasks (walking looking straight ahead and walking with head turns). The G&B App collected accelerometry data during these tasks, and the tasks were repeated twice to assess test-retest reliability. The tasks in quiet stance were also recorded with a force plate, a gold-standard technology for measuring postural sway. Additionally, participants completed three clinical measures, the BBS, the Functional Reach Test (FRT), and the Timed Up and Go Test (TUG). Test-retest reliability within the same session was determined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the standard error of measurement (SEM). Validity was evaluated by correlating the G&B App outcomes against both the force plate data and the clinical measures using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficients. To assess the G&B App’s sensitivity to differences in balance across tasks and repetitions, one-way repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted. During quiet stance, the app demonstrated moderate reliability for steadiness on firm (ICC = 0.72) and compliant surfaces (ICC = 0.75) with eyes closed. For gait tasks, the G&B App indicated moderate to excellent reliability when walking looking straight ahead for gait symmetry (ICC = 0.65), walking speed (ICC = 0.93), step length (ICC = 0.94), and step time (ICC = 0.84). The TUG correlated with app measures under both gait conditions for walking speed (r −0.70 and 0.67), step length (r −0.56 and −0.58), and step time (r 0.58 and 0.50). The BBS correlated with app measures of walking speed under both gait conditions (r 0.55 and 0.51) and step length when walking with head turns (r = 0.53). Force plate measures of total distance wandered showed adequate to excellent correlations with G&B App measures of steadiness. Notably, G&B App measures of walking speed, gait symmetry, step length, and step time, were sensitive to detecting differences in performance between standard walking and the more difficult task of walking with head turns. This study demonstrates the G&B App’s potential as a reliable and valid tool for assessing some gait and balance parameters in middle-to-older age adults, with promise for application in low-income countries like Pakistan. The app’s accessibility and accuracy could enhance healthcare services and support preventive measures related to fall risk.