ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Three-dimensional gait analysis for assessing dynamic ankle spasticity after stroke.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDynamic ankle spasticity during walking is a common complication after stroke. It remains unclear which clinical indicators predict dynamic spasticity and whether three-dimensional (3D) gait parameters can reflect its severity.
methods3D gait analysis data were obtained from 42 patients with dynamic spasticity and a 1:1 propensity score-matched control group. Spasticity was assessed using the Modified Tardieu Scale (MTS). Dynamic kinematic and spatiotemporal gait indicators were analyzed. Spearman correlation analysis was performed to examine associations between gait parameters and MTS scores. A binary logistic regression model (Model 1) was constructed to identify factors associated with dynamic spasticity using gait-related physical assessments and ankle kinematics, with stepwise backward elimination applied. For severity evaluation, an ordinal logistic regression model (Model 2) was built using the MTS X score as the dependent variable.
resultsCompared to controls, the spasticity group showed slower gait speed, shorter step length, and longer double support time. In Model 1, reduced ankle plantarflexion angle and weaker dorsiflexor strength were independently associated with the presence of dynamic spasticity. In Model 2, prolonged double support time on the affected side was significantly associated with dynamic spasticity severity.
conclusionReduced plantarflexion angle and dorsiflexor weakness are key clinical factors associated with walking-related dynamic spasticity, and prolonged double support time may serve as a quantifiable indicator of its severity. These findings support the potential value of 3D gait analysis in identifying and characterizing dynamic spasticity after stroke.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.