Evidence Hub

Does sensor-based gait assessment reflect self-perception of gait impairment in people with multiple sclerosis? A cross- sectional study

Sandra Schulthess, Eveline S. Graf, B. Sommer

Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders, 2025

23 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mobility limitations are common among people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS), with gait impairments significantly impacting daily life. Gait assessments and patient-reported outcome measures are essential for assessing these gait impairments. However, it remains unclear which specific gait metrics best reflect the perceived walking impairments of people with MS. This study aimed to investigate the association between spatiotemporal gait metrics and the perceived walking impairments of people with MS.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study with 23 people with MS was conducted. The patients' perceived walking impairments were assessed by the 12- items MS walking scale (MSWS-12) and the gait metrics were measured by the sensor-based movement analysis system GAITrite® during the timed 25-foot walking test. To calculate the strength of the association between the gait metrics and the MSWS-12 the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was applied.

RESULTS

A positive correlation with the MSWS-12 score was found for mean double support time (rs=0.53, CI [0.12; 0.78]), swing time variability (rs=0.51, CI [0.09; 0-77]) and -symmetry (rs =0.53, CI [0.12; 0.78]), while mean step length (rs =-0.54, CI [-0.79; -0.13]), mean stride length (rs =-0.53, CI [-0.78; -0.12]) and gait velocity (rs =-0.60, CI [-0.82; -0.21]) showed a negative correlation.

CONCLUSION

Velocity remains a valuable metric, reflecting perceived walking impairments of people with MS. The findings to the association…

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: 23 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