Bulletin of Rehabilitation MedicineBulletin of Rehabilitation MedicineВестник восстановительной медицины2078-19622713-2625National Medical Research Center for Rehabilitation and Balneology69537910.38025/2078-1962-2026-25-3-93-102ArticlesСтатьиReview ArticleProblems of gait analysis standardization in the rehabilitation of orthopedic patients: a reviewПроблемы стандартизации анализа походки в реабилитации пациентов ортопедического профиля: обзорhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3245-167XSomovDmitry A.СомовДмитрий Алексеевич
Russian Federation

PhD (Med.), Senior Researcher, Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Doctor

кандидат медицинских наук, старший научный сотрудник, врач физической и реабилитационной медицины

somovda@zdrav.mos.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1787-7015MakarovaMarina R.МакароваМарина Ростиславовна
Russian Federation

PhD (Med.), Associate Professor, Leading Researcher

кандидат медицинских наук, доцент, ведущий научный сотрудник

somovda@zdrav.mos.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6754-5214MayorovEgor A.МайоровЕгор Андреевич
Russian Federation

Junior Researcher, Physical Therapy and Sports Medicine Doctor

младший научный сотрудник, врач по лечебной физкультуре и спортивной медицине

somovda@zdrav.mos.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0629-9659KostenkoElena V.КостенкоЕлена Владимировна
Russian Federation

D.Sc. (Med.), Professor, Deputy Director for Scientific Work; Neurologist, Professor at the Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Medical Genetics

доктор медицинских наук, профессор, заместитель директора по научной работе; невролог, профессор кафедры неврологии, нейрохирургии и медицинской генетики

somovda@zdrav.mos.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5123-5991PogonchenkovaIrena V.ПогонченковаИрэна Владимировна
Russian Federation

D.Sc. (Med.), Associate Professor, Director

доктор медицинских наук, доцент, директор

somovda@zdrav.mos.ruS.I. Spasokukotsky Moscow Centre for Research and Practice in Medical Rehabilitation, Restorative and Sports Medicine of Moscow Healthcare DepartmentМосковский научно-практический центр медицинской реабилитации, восстановительной и спортивной медицины им. С.И. Спасокукоцкого Департамента здравоохранения города МосквыPirogov Russian National Research Medical UniversityРоссийский национальный исследовательский медицинский университет им. Н.И. Пирогова Минздрава России (Пироговский Университет)23062026253931022810202525052026Copyright ©; 2026, Somov D.A., Makarova M.R., Mayorov E.A., Kostenko E.V., Pogonchenkova I.V.Copyright ©; 2026, Сомов Д.А., Макарова М.Р., Майоров Е.А., Костенко Е.В., Погонченкова И.В.2026Somov D.A., Makarova M.R., Mayorov E.A., Kostenko E.V., Pogonchenkova I.V.Сомов Д.А., Макарова М.Р., Майоров Е.А., Костенко Е.В., Погонченкова И.В.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0https://journals.eco-vector.com/2078-1962/article/view/695379

INTRODUCTION. Quantitative analysis of gait biomechanics is a clinically significant tool for assessing human locomotion patterns in health and disease. It is used to prescribe and evaluate the effectiveness of treatment and rehabilitation measures for patients with various medical conditions. The wide variety of instrumental methods for studying gait biomechanics, the lack of standardized measurement protocols, and the consequent high degree of data variability impede the comparison of findings obtained in various medical centers.

AIM. To analyze of standardization of gait biomechanics research in accordance with modern approaches to gait assessment methodology in patients with orthopedic conditions.

MAIN CONTENT OF THE REVIEW. The analysis draws on scientific papers of varying levels of evidence (randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, cohort studies, non-systematic reviews, consensus documents) searched in the PubMed, Mendeley, ScienceDirect, eLIBRARY.RU, GoogleScholar, and Cyberleninka databases for the period 1977–2025 (521 in total). Current approaches to the clinical and instrumental assessment of gait biomechanics are examined, along with the main reasons for the lack of uniformity in terminology, a set of mandatory assessment parameters, and their reference values. The generally accepted clinical analysis of gait biomechanics includes a large number of spatiotemporal, kinetic, kinematic, and dynamic parameters. However, both domestic and international literature continue to exhibit terminological diversity in the description of gait parameters and a lack of systematization of normative values.

CONCLUSION. Standardized protocols for clinical gait analysis of orthopedic patients can include gait parameters with established clinically significant differences that have proven their clinical significance. Otherwise, choosing a biomechanical indicator as a convincing indicator of functional recovery is difficult, despite its widespread use in clinical practice.

ВВЕДЕНИЕ. Клинически значимым инструментом оценки паттернов локомоции человека в норме и патологии является количественный анализ биомеханики походки, применяемый при назначении и оценке эффективности лечебных и реабилитационных мероприятий пациентов различного профиля. Большое разнообразие инструментальных методов исследования биомеханики ходьбы, отсутствие единых протоколов измерения и, как следствие, высокая вариабельность данных затрудняют сравнение результатов, полученных в разных медицинских центрах.

ЦЕЛЬ. Анализ проблемы стандартизации исследования биомеханики походки в соответствии с современными подходами к методологии оценки ходьбы у пациентов с ортопедическими заболеваниями.

ОСНОВНОЕ СОДЕРЖАНИЕ ОБЗОРА. В анализе использованы научные работы разного уровня доказательности (рандомизированные контролируемые исследования, систематические обзоры, когортные исследования, несистематические обзоры, консенсусные документы), найденные в базах данных PubMed, Mendeley, ScienceDirect, eLIBRARY.RU, GoogleScholar, Cyberleninka за 1977–2025 гг. (всего 521 работа). Рассмотрены современные подходы к клинической и инструментальной оценке биомеханики походки и основные причины отсутствия единства терминологии, набора облигатных параметров оценки, их референсных значений. Общепринятый клинический анализ исследования биомеханики ходьбы включает большое количество пространственно-временных, кинетических, кинематических, динамических параметров. Однако в отечественной и зарубежной литературе сохраняется терминологическое разнообразие описанных параметров ходьбы и недостаточная систематизация нормативных значений.

ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ. В стандартизированные протоколы клинического анализа походки пациентов ортопедического профиля могут быть включены параметры ходьбы с установленными клинически значимыми различиями, доказавшими свою клиническую значимость. В противном случае выбор показателя биомеханики как убедительного индикатора функционального восстановления затруднителен, несмотря на его широкое применение в клинической практике.

clinical gait analysisorthopedicsstandardizationклинический анализ походкиортопедиястандартизацияPhinyomark A., Osis S.T., Hettinga B.A., et al. Gender differences in gait kinematics for patients with knee osteoarthritis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016; 17: 157. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1013-zKadaba M.P., Ramakrishnan H.K., Wootten M.E. Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking. J Orthop Res. 1990; 8(3): 383–392. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.1100080310Simon S.R. Quantification of human motion: gait analysis-benefits and limitations to its application to clinical problems. J Biomech. 2004; 37(12): 1869–1880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.047Stanic U., Bajd T., Valencic V., et al. Standardization of kinematic gait measurements and automatic pathological gait pattern diagnostics. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1977; 9(3): 95–105.PRISMA. PRISMA 2020 checklist. Available from: https://www.prisma-statement.org/prisma-2020-checklist (Accessed: October 1, 2025).Скворцов Д.В. Клинический анализ движений. Анализ походки. Иваново: Издательство НПЦ «Стимул», 1996. 344 с. [Skvortsov D.V. Clinical analysis of movements. Gait analysis. Ivanovo: Publishing house of SPC “Stimul”, 1996. 344 p. (In Russ.).]Abbasi-Bafghi H., Fallah-Yakhdani H.R., Meijer O.G., et al. The effects of knee arthroplasty on walking speed: a meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012; 13: 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-13-66Calliess T., Bocklage R., Karkosch R., et al. Clinical evaluation of a mobile sensor-based gait analysis method for outcome measurement after knee arthroplasty. Sensors (Basel). 2014; 14(9): 15953–15964. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140915953Tsatalas T., Giakas G., Spyropoulos G., et al. Walking kinematics and kinetics following eccentric exercise-induced muscle damage. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2013; 23(5): 1229–1236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2013.04.008van Iersel M.B., Olde Rikkert M.G., Borm G.F. A method to standardize gait and balance variables for gait velocity. Gait Posture. 2007; 26(2): 226–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.09.002Tenenbaum S., Coleman S.C., Brodsky J.W. Improvement in gait following combined ankle and subtalar arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014; 96(22): 1863–1869. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJ S.M.01448Zügner R., Tranberg R., Sharegi B., Kärrholm J. Gait pattern in patients treated with a total hip arthroplasty due to an acute displaced cervical neck fracture. Hip Int. 2024; 34(3): 421–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000231208099Binotto M.A., Lenardt M.H., Rodríguez-Martínez M.D.C. Physical frailty and gait speed in community elderly: a systematic review. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2018; 52: e03392. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-220X2017028703392Fukuchi C.A., Fukuchi R.K., Duarte M. Effects of walking speed on gait biomechanics in healthy participants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2019; 8(1): 153. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1063-zSchloemer S.A., Thompson J.A., Silder A., et al. Age-Related Differences in Gait Kinematics, Kinetics, and Muscle Function: A Principal Component Analysis. Ann Biomed Eng. 2017; 45(3): 695-710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-016-1713-4Ruiz-Ruiz L., Jimenez A.R., Garcia-Villamil G., Seco F. Detecting Fall Risk and Frailty in Elders with Inertial Motion Sensors: A Survey of Significant Gait Parameters. Sensors (Basel). 2021; 21(20): 6918. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21206918McCrory J.L., White S.C., Lifeso R.M. Vertical ground reaction forces: objective measures of gait following hip arthroplasty. Gait Posture. 2001; 14(2): 104–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0966-6362(01)00140-0Perron M., Malouin F., Moffet H., McFadyen B.J. Three-dimensional gait analysis in women with a total hip arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2000; 15(7): 504–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0268-0033(00)00002-4Foucher K.C. Identifying clinically meaningful benchmarks for gait improvement after total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Res. 2016; 34(1): 88–96. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.22996Leijendekkers R.A, Marra M.A., Kolk S., et al. Gait symmetry and hip strength in women with developmental dysplasia following hip arthroplasty compared to healthy subjects: A cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2018; 13(2): e0193487. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193487van den Akker-Scheek I., Stevens M., Bulstra S.K., et al. Recovery of gait after short-stay total hip arthroplasty. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007; 88(3): 361–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2006.11.026Bejek Z., Paróczai R., Illyés A., Kiss R.M. The influence of walking speed on gait parameters in healthy people and in patients with osteoarthritis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006; 14(7): 612–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-005-0005-6Azadian E., Majlesi M., Jafarnezhadgero A.A. The effect of working memory intervention on the gait patterns of the elderly. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2018; 22(4): 881–887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.08.008Choi J.H, Kim B.R, Kim S.R., et al. Performance-based physical function correlates with walking speed and distance at 3 months post unilateral total knee arthroplasty. Gait Posture. 2021; 87: 163–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.04.041Garner A.J., Dandridge O.W., van Arkel R.J., Cobb J.P. The compartmental approach to revision of partial knee arthroplasty results in nearer-normal gait and improved patient reported outcomes compared to total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023; 31(3): 1143–1152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06691-9Методы оценки реабилитационной эффективности протезирования нижних конечностей. ГОСТ Р 53871-2021. Доступно на: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200179697 (дата обращения: 01.10.2025). [Methods for assessing the rehabilitation effectiveness of lower limb prosthetics. GOST R 53871-2021. Available from: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200179697 (Accessed: October 1, 2025) (In Russ.).]Yeo S.S., Park G.Y. Accuracy Verification of Spatio-Temporal and Kinematic Parameters for Gait Using Inertial Measurement Unit System. Sensors (Basel). 2020; 20(5): 1343. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20051343Urwin S.G., Kader D.F., Caplan N., et al. Gait analysis of fixed bearing and mobile bearing total knee prostheses during walking: do mobile bearings offer functional advantages? Knee. 2014; 21(2): 391–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2013.10.007Madsen M.S., Ritter M.A., Morris H.H., et al. The effect of total hip arthroplasty surgical approach on gait. J Orthop Res. 2004; 22(1): 44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0736-0266(03)00151-7Tudor-Locke C., Mora-Gonzalez J., Ducharme S.W., et al. Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 61–85-year-old adults: the CADENCE-Adults study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021; 18(1): 129. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01199-4Vaverka F., Elfmark M., Svoboda Z., Janura M. System of gait analysis based on ground reaction force assessment. Acta Gymnica. 2015; 45(4): 187–193. https://doi.org/10.5507/ag.2015.022Ullrich B., Stening J., Pelzer T., Raab J. Long-term data of gait characteristics and moment-knee angle relations in female total knee arthroplasty patients. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2015; 30(5):462–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.03.009White S.C., Lifeso R.M. Altering asymmetric limb loading after hip arthroplasty using real-time dynamic feedback when walking. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005; 86(10): 1958–1963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2005.04.010Queen R.M., Appleton J.S., Butler R.J., et al. Total hip arthroplasty surgical approach does not alter postoperative gait mechanics one year after surgery. PM R. 2014; 6(3): 221–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2013.09.006Скворцов Д.В. Диагностика двигательной патологии инструментальными методами: анализ походки, стабилометрия. М.: Научно-медицинская фирма МБН, 2007. 640 с. [Skvortsov D.V. Diagnosis of movement pathology using instrumental methods: gait analysis, stabilometry. M.: Nauchno-medicinskaya firma MBN, 2007. 640 p. (In Russ.).]Choi W. Comparison of physical function, proprioception, muscle strength, postural balance, and walking in older women with and without total knee arthroplasty. Medicine (Baltimore). 2023; 102(24): e33034. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000033034Kobsar D., Masood Z., Khan H., et al. Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis in Adults with Osteoarthritis-A Scoping Review. Sensors (Basel). 2020; 20(24): 7143. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20247143Nha K.W., Shon O.J., Kong B.S., Shin Y.S. Gait comparison of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty during level walking. PLoS One. 2018; 13(8): e0203310. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203310Labanca L., Ciardulli F., Bonsanto F., et al. Balance and proprioception impairment, assessment tools, and rehabilitation training in patients with total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021; 22(1): 1055. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04919-wFreddolini M., Esposito F., Marcucci M., et al. Does crutch length influence gait parameters after total hip replacement surgery? Gait Posture. 2018; 60: 262–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.07.035Zomar B.O., Bryant D., Hunter S., et al. A randomised trial comparing spatio-temporal gait parameters after total hip arthroplasty between the direct anterior and direct lateral surgical approaches. Hip Int. 2018; 28(5): 478–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/1120700018760262Бойченко Р.А., Горнов С.В. Медицинская реабилитация в спорте высших достижений после реконструкции передней крестообразной связки коленного сустава. Медицина экстремальных ситуаций. 2022; 24(2): 94–100. https://doi.org/10.47183/mes.2022.022 [Boichenko R.A., Gornov S.V. Medical rehabilitation of high performance athletes after reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament of the knee. Medicina extremalnyh situaciy. 2022; 24(2): 94–100 (In Russ.).]Мезенцева Е.А., Еремушкин М.А., Колышенков В.А. Сравнительная характеристика биомеханических параметров ходьбы у пользователей протезов бедра с механическим и электронным коленными модулями. Вопросы курортологии, физиотерапии и лечебной физической культуры. 2022; 99(4): 13–19. https://doi.org/10.17116/kurort20229904113 [Mezentseva E.A., Eremushkin M.A., Kolyshenkov V.A. Comparative characteristics of biomechanical walking parameters in users of hip prostheses with mechanical and electronic knee modules. Problems of Balneology, Physiotherapy and Exercise Therapy. 2022; 99(4): 13–19 (In Russ.).]Debbi E.M., Wolf A., Goryachev Y., et al. Alterations in sagittal plane knee kinetics in knee osteoarthritis using a biomechanical therapy device. Ann Biomed Eng. 2015; 43(5): 1089–1097. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-014-1177-3Son S.J., Kim H., Seeley M.K., Hopkins J.T. Altered Walking Neuromechanics in Patients With Chronic Ankle Instability. J Athl Train. 2019; 54(6): 684–697. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-478-17Негреева М.Б., Ларионов С.Н., Сороковиков В.А., Шендеров В.А. Биомеханические аспекты исследований дегенеративно-дистрофических заболеваний поясничного отдела позвоночника и тазобедренных суставов (обзор литературы). Бюллетень ВСНЦ СО РАМН. 2013; 5: 187–191. [Negreeva M.B., Larionov S.N., Sorokovikov V.A., Shenderov V.A. Biomechanical aspects of researches of degenerative-dystrophic diseases of lumbar segment of spine and hip joints (review of literature). Bulleten Vostochno-Sibirskogo nauchnogo centra Sibirskogo otdeleniya Rossiyskoy akademii medicinskih nauk. 2013; 5: 187–191 (In Russ.).]Bianchi L., Angelini D., Orani G.P., et al. Kinematic coordination in human gait: relation to mechanical energy cost. J Neurophysiol. 1998; 79(4): 2155–2170. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1998.79.4.2155Moyer R., Lanting B., Marsh J., et al. Postoperative Gait Mechanics After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JBJS Rev. 2018; 6(11): e1. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.17.00133Nantel J., Termoz N., Vendittoli P.A., et al. Gait patterns after total hip arthroplasty and surface replacement arthroplasty. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009; 90(3): 463–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.08.215Sonntag D., Uhlenbrock D., Bardeleben A., et al. Gait with and without forearm crutches in patients with total hip arthroplasty. Int J Rehabil Res. 2000; 23(3): 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-200023030-00014Gu M.Y., Zhang J.Y., Chen M.Y., et al. Portable Gait Analysis of Patients With Rotating Hinge Knee Megaprosthesis Compared With Total Knee Arthroplasty. Orthop Surg. 2024; 16(12): 3141–3150. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14270Zhou L., Tunca C., Fischer E., et al. Validation of an IMU Gait Analysis Algorithm for Gait Monitoring in Daily Life Situations. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2020; 2020: 4229–4232. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC44109.2020.9176827Aminian K., Najafi B., Büla C., et al. Spatio-temporal parameters of gait measured by an ambulatory system using miniature gyroscopes. J Biomech. 2002; 35(5): 689–699. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9290(02)00008-8Petraglia F., Scarcella L., Pedrazzi G., et al. Inertial sensors versus standard systems in gait analysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2019; 55(2): 265–280. https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.18.05306-6Gorton G.E. 3rd, Hebert D.A., Gannotti M.E. Assessment of the kinematic variability among 12 motion analysis laboratories. Gait Posture. 2009; 29(3): 398–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.10.060Fonseca M., Gasparutto X., Grouvel G., et al. Evaluation of lower limb and pelvic marker placement precision among different evaluators and its impact on gait kinematics computed with the Conventional Gait Model. Gait Posture. 2023; 104: 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.05.028Downing N.D., Clark D.I., Hutchinson J.W., et al. Hip abductor strength following total hip arthroplasty: a prospective comparison of the posterior and lateral approach in 100 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 2001; 72(3): 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016470152846501Yamaguchi S., Tanaka Y., Banks S., et al. In vivo kinematics and articular surface congruency of total ankle arthroplasty during gait. J Biomech. 2012; 45(12): 2103–2108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.05.043Slijepcevic D., Zeppelzauer M., Schwab C., et al. Input representations and classification strategies for automated human gait analysis. Gait Posture. 2020; 76: 198–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.10.021Alizadehsaravi L., Bruijn S.M., Muijres W., et al. Improvement in gait stability in older adults after ten sessions of standing balance training. PLoS One. 2022; 17(7): e0242115. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242115Lewis M.M., Waltz C., Scelina L., et al. Gait patterns during overground and virtual omnidirectional treadmill walking. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2024; 21(1): 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-023-01286-6Macoveciuc I., Rando C.J., Borrion H. Forensic Gait Analysis and Recognition: Standards of Evidence Admissibility. J Forensic Sci. 2019; 64(5): 1294–1303. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14036