Evidence Hub

A cross-sectional study of evaluating cervical spondylotic myelopathy based on gait and plantar pressures

Xuhong Zhang, Zi-Chuan Wu, Hanlin Song, Aochen Xu, Jun-Bin Liu, Jun-Zhe Sheng, Baifeng Sun, M. Qi et al.

European Journal of Medical Research, 2025

154 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

This is a cross-sectional study. To examine the differences in gait patterns between cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) patients and normal controls using visual recognition-based gait analysis and plantar pressure techniques, and to further analyze the differences in gait between different levels of disease severity as well as between gender groups. The development and progression of CSM symptoms are gradual and obscure. Although previous studies have objectively assessed CSM-specific gait patterns using motion cameras as well as mechanical platforms, these methods have limitations such as limited metrics that can be analyzed or inconvenience for simple screening. Therefore, there is a need to develop effective screening methods. A total of 154 asymptomatic volunteers and 147 patients with CSM were recruited. Gait parameters were obtained by capturing video of the patient while walking via a smartphone-based computer vision algorithm (using the OpenPose framework), and plantar pressure distributions were measured using wireless sensor-equipped insoles (sampling rate 50–100 Hz). Gender, age, and body mass index were employed as matching variables, resulting in 102 matched pairs. An independent-samples t-test was used to analyze between-group differences, and analysis of variance was utilized for comparisons among three or more groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, area under the curve (AUC), and the Youden index were employed to determine cut-off…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 154 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free