Wearable sensors are essential for gait analysis outside of traditional laboratory environments. However, selection of the right sensor technology involves several trade-offs. Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) offer high temporal resolution which are ideal for detecting gait events but they suffer from drift. Ultra-Wideband (UWB) provides stable spatial data, but are less precise for detecting event timing. This paper presents a comparative study of three distinct foot-mounted sensor methodologies for heel strike detection and cadence estimation: (1) IMU-Only approach, (2) UWB-Only approach, and (3) a multi-sensor IMU+UWB fusion approach. Each method is evaluated against a camera-based ground truth system using data from four subjects. Results show the IMU-Only method is inconsistent, with moderate event precision (Avg. F1: 0.798), temporal accuracy (Avg. MAE: 47.99 ms), and subject-dependent cadence accuracy (Avg. Acc: 89.59%). The UWB-Only method provides robust event detection (Avg. F1: 0.811) with similar temporal error (Avg. MAE: 49.0 ms) but is exceptionally accurate for cadence estimation (Avg. Acc: 96.94%). The IMU+UWB fusion approach achieves the highest event precision (Avg. Precision: 0.835) and the best temporal accuracy (Avg. MAE: 46.51 ms), while also maintaining robust cadence accuracy (Avg. Acc: 95.62%). In conclusion, while the UWB-Only method is ideal for cadence-only applications, the IMU+UWB fusion approach provides the best overall balance of high event precision, superior temporal accuracy, and reliable cadence estimation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sahu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: