Cited by 47Bone fractures and treatmentsLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesHip and Femur Fractures

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gait Analysis to Monitor Fracture Healing of the Lower Leg

Open access

Abstract

Fracture healing is typically monitored by infrequent radiographs. Radiographs come at the cost of radiation exposure and reflect fracture healing with a time lag due to delayed fracture mineralization following increases in stiffness. Since union problems frequently occur after fractures, better and timelier methods to monitor the healing process are required. In this review, we provide an overview of the changes in gait parameters following lower leg fractures to investigate whether gait analysis can be used to monitor fracture healing. Studies assessing gait after lower leg fractures that were treated either surgically or conservatively were included. Spatiotemporal gait parameters, kinematics, kinetics, and pedography showed improvements in the gait pattern throughout the healing process of lower leg fractures. Especially gait speed and asymmetry measures have a high potential to monitor fracture healing. Pedographic measurements showed differences in gait between patients with and without union. No literature was available for other gait measures, but it is expected that further parameters reflect progress in bone healing. In conclusion, gait analysis seems to be a valuable tool for monitoring the healing process and predicting the occurrence of non-union of lower leg fractures.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/bioengineering10020255

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Warmerdam, E., Orth, M., Pohlemann, T., & Ganse, B.
Affiliations
Saarland University (DE)
Corresponding author
Warmerdam, Elke
Venue
Bioengineering
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-02-15
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
255
ISSN
2306-5354 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4320917375
Cited by
47
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 3
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioengineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Publications of the UdS (Saarland University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • Werner Siemens Foundation (project Smart Implants 2.0)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)
  • Saarland University within the ‚Open Access Publication Funding‘ program
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone fractures and treatments
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hip and Femur Fractures
Keywords
fracture healing, lower leg fractures, gait analysis, walking speed, gait asymmetry, pedography, spatiotemporal gait parameters, gait kinematics, gait kinetics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review