Gait analysis has traditionally been carried out in a laboratory environment using expensive equipment, but, recently, reliable, affordable, and wearable sensors have enabled integration into clinical applications as well as use during activities of daily living. Real-time gait analysis is key to the development of gait rehabilitation techniques and assistive devices such as neuroprostheses. This article presents a systematic review of wearable sensors and techniques used in real-time gait analysis, and their application to pathological gait. From four major scientific databases, we identified 1262 articles of which 113 were analyzed in full-text. We found that heel strike and toe off are the most sought-after gait events. Inertial measurement units (IMU) are the most widely used wearable sensors and the shank and foot are the preferred placements. Insole pressure sensors are the most common sensors for ground-truth validation for IMU-based gait detection. Rule-based techniques relying on threshold or peak detection are the most widely used gait detection method. The heterogeneity of evaluation criteria prevented quantitative performance comparison of all methods. Although most studies predicted that the proposed methods would work on pathological gait, less than one third were validated on such data. Clinical applications of gait detection algorithms were considered, and we recommend a combination of IMU and rule-based methods as an optimal solution@en

Body weight support (BWS) systems are widely used in gait research and rehabilitation. This letter introduces a new three-dimensional overground BWS system, called the RYSEN. The RYSEN is designed to be intrinsically safe and low power consuming, while still performing at least as well as existing BWS systems regarding human-robot interaction. These features are mainly achieved by decoupling degrees of freedom between motors: slow/high-torque motors for vertical motion and fast/low-torque motors for horizontal motion. This letter explains the design and evaluates its performance on power consumption and safety. Power consumption is expressed in terms of the sum of the positive mechanical output power of all motor axes. Safety is defined as the difference between the mechanical power available for horizontal and vertical movements and the mechanical power that is needed to perform its task. The results of the RYSEN are compared to the performance of three similar systems: a gantry, the FLOAT, and a classic cable robot. The results show that the RYSEN and a gantry consume approximately the same amount of power. The amount is approximately half the power consumed by the next-best system. For the safety, the gantry is taken as the benchmark, because of its perfect decoupling of directions. The RYSEN has a surplus of 268 W and 126 W for horizontal and vertical movements, respectively. This is significantly lower than the next-best system, which has a surplus of 1088 W and 1967 W, respectively@en