Kadaba et al. tested whether a single quantitative gait evaluation produces stable enough data to support clinical decisions. Forty normal adults were evaluated three times per day on three separate days using full 3D kinematics, kinetics, and surface EMG. The study established which gait variables are reliable and identified marker placement as the dominant source of between-day error.
When you order a gait analysis on a child with cerebral palsy, you are implicitly trusting that the numbers reflect the patient's true movement pattern and not measurement noise. Before Kadaba's work, that trust had no empirical foundation — gait labs produced data, but no one had rigorously shown it was reproducible enough to guide surgery.
This paper is why we act on a single gait evaluation rather than requiring repeat testing. Sagittal plane kinematics (the variables driving most surgical decisions, including lever arm dysfunction and crouch gait) showed CMC values above 0.975 within and between days in normal subjects.
When comparing gait data across visits or between labs, treat frontal and transverse plane angles with caution. The low between-day CMC for hip rotation (~0.41) is a marker artifact, not a real change. Removing the daily mean offset recovers the signal. This distinction matters when you are deciding whether a patient's rotational profile has truly changed after femoral derotation osteotomy.
The study was performed in normal adults aged 18–40, so these repeatability benchmarks do not automatically transfer to children or patients with spasticity, weakness, or pain. Populations where gait analysis is most commonly used clinically.
Kadaba et al. tested whether a single quantitative gait evaluation produces stable enough data to support clinical decisions. Forty normal adults were evaluated three times per day on three separate days using full 3D kinematics, kinetics, and surface EMG. The study established which gait variables are reliable and identified marker placement as the dominant source of between-day error.
When you order a gait analysis on a child with cerebral palsy, you are implicitly trusting that the numbers reflect the patient's true movement pattern and not measurement noise. Before Kadaba's work, that trust had no empirical foundation — gait labs produced data, but no one had rigorously shown it was reproducible enough to guide surgery.
This paper is why we act on a single gait evaluation rather than requiring repeat testing. Sagittal plane kinematics (the variables driving most surgical decisions, including lever arm dysfunction and crouch gait) showed CMC values above 0.975 within and between days in normal subjects.
When comparing gait data across visits or between labs, treat frontal and transverse plane angles with caution. The low between-day CMC for hip rotation (~0.41) is a marker artifact, not a real change. Removing the daily mean offset recovers the signal. This distinction matters when you are deciding whether a patient's rotational profile has truly changed after femoral derotation osteotomy.
The study was performed in normal adults aged 18–40, so these repeatability benchmarks do not automatically transfer to children or patients with spasticity, weakness, or pain. Populations where gait analysis is most commonly used clinically.