Motion Cues Analysis for Parkinson Gait Recognition

Background: Previous assessment methods for PG recognition used sensor mechanisms for PG that may cause discomfort. In order to avoid stress of applying wearable sensors, computer vision (CV) based diagnostic systems for PG recognition have been proposed. Main constraints in these methods are the laboratory setup procedures: Novel colored dresses for the patients were specifically designed to segment the test body from a specific colored background. Objective: To develop an image processing tool for home-assessment of Parkinson Gait(PG) by analyzing motion cues extracted during the gait cycles. Methods: The system is based on the idea that a normal body attains equilibrium during the gait by aligning the body posture with the axis of gravity. Due to the rigidity in muscular tone, persons with PD fail to align their bodies with the axis of gravity. The leaned posture of PD patients appears to fall forward. Whereas a normal posture exhibits a constant erect posture throughout the gait. Patients with PD walk with shortened stride angle (less than 15 degrees on average) with high variability in the stride frequency. Whereas a normal gait exhibits a constant stride frequency with an average stride angle of 45 degrees. In order to analyze PG, levodopa-responsive patients and normal controls were videotaped with several gait cycles. First, the test body is segmented in each frame of the gait video based on the pixel contrast from the background to form a silhouette. Next, the center of gravity of this silhouette is calculated. This silhouette is further skeletonized from the video frames to extract the motion cues. Two motion cues were stride frequency based on the cyclic leg motion and the lean frequency based on the angle between the leaned torso tangent and the axis of gravity. The differences in the peaks in stride and lean frequencies between PG and normal gait are calculated using Cosine Similarity measurements. Results: High cosine dissimilarity was observed in the stride and lean frequencies between PG and normal gait. High variations are found in the stride intervals of PG whereas constant stride intervals are found in the normal gait. Conclusions: We propose an algorithm as a source to eliminate laboratory constraints and discomfort during PG analysis. Installing this tool in a home computer with a webcam allows assessment of gait in the home environment.