# A Novel Wearable Foot and Ankle Monitoring System for the Assessment of Gait Biomechanics
###### Abstract
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & Visualizing CoP users were able to improve their body posture during squats and dead-lift exercises & Features extracted: maximum, minimum, mean, range, zero-crossing rate, root-mean-square values, variance, standard variance, skewness, and kurtosis & Higher pressure values under the forefoot were determined for black participants when compared with white (t = 0.000, \(p\) \(<\) 0.05, d = 0.78) and coloured variance, standard variance, skewness, and kurtosis & \(p\) \(<\) 0.05, d = 0.35) \\
**Results and Accuracy** & Dead-lifts 10 kg for beginners & Classifier: Random forest & Lower pressure values under the forefoot were determined for black participants when compared with white (t = 0.000, \(p\) \(<\) 0.05, d = 0.78) and coloured variance, standard variance, skewness, and kurtosis & \(p\) \(<\) 0.026, \(p\) \(<\) 0.05, d = 0.35) \\  & Dead-lifts 10 kg for advanced users & Classifier: Random forest & Lower pressure values under the forefoot were determined for white participants compared with white (t = 0.003, \(p\) \(<\) 0.05, d = 0.94) \\  & Dead-lifts 20 kg for beginners & 20\% data testing, 5-fold cross validation) & and coloured (t = 0.02, \(p\) \(<\) 0.05, d = 0.95) \\  & Dead-lifts 20 kg for advanced users & & \(d\) = 0.58) participants \\ \hline  & & & \\
**Muscles** & Flarezius, spinal encoders, glutues maximums, adductor magnus, hamstrings, quadriceps femoris & n.a. & n.a. \\ \hline  & & 16 force-sensitive pressure points, based on resistive technology + 15 markers (leg, waist, shoulder) & 9 force sensors + gyroscope + accelerometer & 10 \\ \hline  & & 9: (1) the big toe (T1), (2–6) the five metatarsal heads & 10: (1) the hallux (great toe), (2) lateral toes, (3–7) metatarsal 1–5, (8) midfoot, (9) medial heel, and (10) lateral heel \\ \hline  & & & \\
**Hardware Used for Data Collection** & GymSoles prototype, placed on both feet + an OptiTrack motion tracking system & n.a. & RS Footscan (RSscan, Belgium) system was used to measure the plantar pressure values of the foot \\ \hline  & & & 180 (gender: 90 male, and 90 \\
**No. of Participants** & 13 (9 males and 4 females) & 20 & female; race: 60 black, 60 white, and 60 coloured) \\ \hline  & & & Ref. [13] presents a \\  & Ref. [9] describes a way to improve the body posture by visualizing the center of pressure (CoP) & multimodal sensor inside that allows capturing kinetic and kinematic information reflecting the foot dynamic characteristics, for person recognition & Ref. [16] presents generation of normative tables from plantar pressure data \\ \hline  & & & \\
**Reference** & Ref. [9] describes a way to improve the body posture by visualizing the center of pressure (CoP) & Ref. [13] presents a \\  & & & multimodal sensor inside that allows capturing kinetic and kinematic information reflecting the foot dynamic characteristics, for person recognition \\ \hline  & & & \\
**Results and accuracy** & The instants of foot off (FO) and foot contact (FC) with respect to the onset of the movement (t0) did not change with added load The onset of SOL activity with respect to FO was significantly anticipated in the loaded trials (F(1,9) = 5.183, \(p\) \(<\) 0.05); velocity per se had no significant effect (F(1,9) = 0.01, \(p\) = 0.92) & Ref. [16] presents generation of normative tables from plantar pressure data \\  & No significant difference in the time of onset across the three muscle bursts (SQL, GM and GL) (F(2,6) = 0.96, \(p\) = 0.40) & There was no correlation between the total muscle activity during stance phase and ravolicular drop (r = 0.046, \(p\) = 0.816), age (r = 0.024, \(p\) = 0.902) and weight (r = 0.163, \(p\) = 0.408) & There was no correlation between the total muscle activity during stance phase and ravolicular drop (r = 0.046, \(p\) = 0.816), age (r = 0.024, \(p\) = 0.902) and weight (r = 0.163, \(p\) = 0.408) \\  & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}