Fall Detection and Prevention: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Enzi Gong and Version 3 by Enzi Gong.

A fall can be described as an unpredicted event leading the participants to rest on the lower level (ground or floor). As a result, it causes injuries that can often be fatal. Psychological grievances are also considered as the consequence of falls. People may suffer from anxiety, depression, activity restriction, and fear of falling. The primary physiological issue in older adults is fear of falling, restricting their Activities of Daily Life (ADL). This fear leads to activity restriction, which may lead to inadequate gait balance and weakened muscle that affects the mobility and independence of older adults. Therefore, remote/wearable technologies are required to track, detect, and prevent falls for improving the overall quality of life (QoL). For this purpose, understanding of falls can be classified as fall prevention and fall detection. Fall detection refers to the detection of a fall using sensors/cameras to summon help. In contrast, fall prevention aims to avert falls by observing human locomotion. Numerous systems have been developed using different sensors and algorithms to detect and prevent the fall.

  • fall detection
  • fall prevention
  • machine learning

1. Overview

Falls are unusual actions that cause a significant health risk among older people. The growing percentage of people of old age requires urgent development of fall detection and prevention systems. The emerging technology focuses on developing such systems to improve quality of life, especially for the elderly. A fall prevention system tries to predict and reduce the risk of falls. In contrast, a fall detection system observes the fall and generates a help notification to minimize the consequences of falls. A plethora of technical and review papers exist in the literature with a primary focus on fall detection. Similarly, several studies are relatively old, with a focus on wearables only, and use statistical and threshold-based approaches with a high false alarm rate. Therefore, this paper presents the latest research trends in fall detection and prevention systems using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. It uses recent studies and analyzes datasets, age groups, ML algorithms, sensors, and location. Additionally, it provides a detailed discussion of the current trends of fall detection and prevention systems with possible future directions. This overview can help researchers understand the current systems and propose new methodologies by improving the highlighted issues. 

2. Fall Detection

Aging is a worldwide problem related to life expectancy [1]. The World Health Organization (WHO) states that the elderly population is 20% of the world’s population [2]. Another report states that older people (above 65 years) will increase to 1.5 billion by the end of 2050 [3]. In general, old age reduces the overall physical, cognitive, and sensory functionalities [4][5]. Therefore, an older adult faces difficulty performing routine tasks such as walking, jogging, eating, and dressing up [6][7][8]. Falling is a significant challenge in the elderly group that can reduce life expectancy. Approximately 35% of people (above 65 years) have one or more falls per year [9]. In addition to old age, several other factors such as environment, physical activity, and cardiovascular disorders cause falls. It is a major source of physical injuries, and often, these injuries require hospitalization [10][11][12]. Annually, 37.3 million falls need medical attention, and 0.65 million falls resulting in deaths [13].
A fall can be described as an unpredicted event leading the participants to rest on the lower level (ground or floor) [14]. As a result, it causes injuries that can often be fatal [15][16]. Psychological grievances are also considered as the consequence of falls. People may suffer from anxiety, depression, activity restriction, and fear of falling [17][18]. The primary physiological issue in older adults is fear of falling, restricting their Activities of Daily Life (ADL) [19]. This fear leads to activity restriction, which may lead to inadequate gait balance and weakened muscle that affects the mobility and independence of older adults. Therefore, remote/wearable technologies are required to track, detect, and prevent falls for improving the overall quality of life (QoL) [20][21]. For this purpose, understanding of falls can be classified as fall prevention and fall detection. Fall detection refers to the detection of a fall using sensors/cameras to summon help. In contrast, fall prevention aims to avert falls by observing human locomotion. Numerous systems have been developed using different sensors and algorithms to detect and prevent the fall.
The authors of [14][22] presented an overview of the fall detection techniques. However, both the studies include relatively old literature published in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Mubashir et al. [23] classified the fall detection approaches into wearable, ambient, and camera-based approaches. Similarly, Igual et al. [24] talks about the issues and trends in fall detection schemes. The study [25] is specific to fall detection using wearable sensors. All the above-mentioned reviews only discuss fall detection schemes with no interest in fall prevention. In 2014, Delahoz et al. [26] presented a review on fall detection and prevention techniques. Recently, Saboor et al. [27] published a review on gait analysis using machine learning. However, only 14% of their studies are specific to fall detection and prevention. Ren et al. [28] present a comprehensive overview of fall detection and prevention techniques. However, most presented schemes use statistical approaches that often generate many false alarms during detection and classification. Furthermore, statistical approaches are less efficient in the presence of complex and nonlinear problems [29]. In general, gait analysis for fall detection and prevention often generates noisy data during the acquisition. Statistical methods are generally sensitive to noisy data that leads to performance degradation [30]. Therefore, the latest research incorporates Machine Learning (ML) because of high classification accuracy for fall detection and prevention. Recently, Islam et al. [31] presents a review on fall detection using deep learning techniques. However, the scope of the review is limited to deep learning techniques for fall detection only. This paper aims to provide an overview of studies using ML for fall detection and prevention. The overall contributions of this paper are as follows:
  • It provides an overview of the fall detection and prevention systems using wearables and non-wearables.
  • It elaborates on the frequently used ML algorithms in fall detection and prevention.
  • It provides a detailed analysis of the recent state-of-the-art studies. The analysis covers the dataset, participants, ML algorithms, acquisition sensors, and their placements.
  • It evaluates performance parameters such as accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for different combinations of ML algorithms, sensors, and placements.
  • It provides a detailed discussion on the latest trends in fall detection and prevention systems along with the future directions.

3. Fall Detection and Prevention Systems

The development of fall detection and prevention systems has become a hot research topic during the last few years. Various approaches are used for developing such systems. These systems are classified into two broader categories: wearable systems and non-wearable systems.

32.1. Non-Wearable Systems

Non-wearable systems are composed of sensors placed around the human proximity for data/gait monitoring. These systems are further subdivided into vision-based sensors, and floor-based sensors [32]. Vision sensors such as cameras, infrared sensors, and Laser Range Scanners (LRS) [33] take optical measurements and use image processing for analysis. Video surveillance is a common type of such system, which captures images and uses different algorithms to determine fall occurrence. In contrast, floor-based sensors such as Ground Reaction Force (GRF) sensors and pressure sensors observe the force extracted by human feet to observe the fall [34]. The number of sensors varies from experiment to experiment. The primary drawback of non-wearable systems is their limited coverage. Such systems can be implemented at offices, homes, and experiment labs, making them less scalable and expensive. Non-wearable systems also compromise users’ privacy [35][36]. Therefore, it is not optimal to use such systems for most real-life applications.

32.2. Wearable Systems

Wearable systems consist of devices/sensors that can be attached to the human body for data collection. Wearable systems consist of accelerometers, gyroscopes, magnetometers, IMUs, etc. [37]. An overview of wearable sensors is given in Table 1. The primary advantage of wearable systems is their ability to collect data outside the laboratory environment [38]. Therefore, such systems are feasible for analyzing fall detection or for preventing falls while performing ADLs. These sensors are often embedded in smartphones that can collect data without investing in any new equipment [39]. Additionally, they provide better privacy than non-wearable systems. However, wearable devices have limited lifetime processing power [40][41]. Furthermore, the wearable’s data need further processing using statistical or ML algorithms for decision making, as shown in Figure 1.
Sensors 21 05134 g001 550
Figure 1. An Overview of Fall Detection and Prevention System.
Table 1. Overview of Wearable Sensor.
The statistical approaches often lead to low classification accuracy and prove to be less efficient with noisy data. Therefore, ML techniques are widely used for fall identification and prevention [42]. Basic fall activities that are identified are falling forward, falling backward, falling sideways, spinning clockwise, and spinning anticlockwise [43]. The ML algorithms classify fall activities from non-fall activities based on the classifier being trained [43][44][45]. Similarly, these ML classifiers identify the abnormalities in gait and try to prevent falls using techniques such as muscle stimulation [46]. An overview of a general system is presented in the next subsection.

32.3. System Overview

The overall system for fall detection and prevention consists of the five steps as shown in Figure 2. The first step is data collection depending on the application requirements. There are various data collection methods, i.e., public datasets, controlled environments, and realistic environments. Publicly available datasets include gait features that can be used to develop such systems [47][48]. In contrast, a lab or realistic environment uses wearable [49][50][51][52] or non-wearable devices [53] for data acquisition.
Sensors 21 05134 g002 550
Figure 2. Procedure for fall detection and prevention.
In general, the acquired data are noisy. Therefore, preprocessing helps to remove the noisy and unwanted signals from the data. For that, the system uses preprocessing filters such as Kalman Filter [54] and Median Filter [55] etc. The third step is feature extraction to obtain the desired features from the preprocessed data. The features can vary from experiment to experiment performed by different researchers. For example, in speech recognition, the desired features are sound length, noise ratio, matching filters, and relative power. Similarly, edges and objects are used as desired features in computer vision applications. In contrast, fall detection or prevention applications require a change in acceleration, rotation, or angular velocity as the desired feature set. The slight change in any of these parameters helps visualize the gait changes, resulting in fall detection or fall prevention. Therefore, the mean, standard deviation, and variance of these features are considered valuable data for such application. Overall, feature selection is a crucial step, as classification accuracy heavily relies on the selected features. Feature selection also reduces the dataset volume and cost of the pattern recognition process. Features can be selected using filter methods or wrapper methods [56][57].
A large number of features can cause overfitting, while fewer features may cause underfitting. Therefore, this step requires additional attention to enhance the overall performance of the system. The fourth step uses ML algorithms to classify irregular gait, falls, or ADL. Generally, it divides the data into training and testing data. The ratio of each data type depends on the experiment of system design. This step applies the ML algorithms on training data to identify fall activities or irregular gait for fall prevention. After training the classifier, it uses test data for the performance evaluation. This step includes various matrices such as the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the results obtained to analyze the system’s overall performance. As we can see, the ML algorithms help in identifying fall detection or prevention. Therefore, the next section discusses the functionality of major machine learning algorithms used for fall detection and prevention.

References

  1. Sciubba, J.D. Population Aging as a Global Issue; Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies: Oxford, UK, 2020.
  2. Bittencourt, V.L.L.; Graube, S.L.; Stumm, E.M.F.; Battisti, I.D.E.; Loro, M.M.; Winkelmann, E.R. Factors associated with the risk of falls in hospitalized adult patients. Rev. Esc. De Enferm. USP 2017, 51.
  3. United Nations. World Population Ageing 2020 Highlights: Living Arrangements of Older Persons; United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs: NY, USA, 2020; Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/news/world-population-ageing-2020-highlights (accessed on 24 July 2021).
  4. McPhee, J.S.; French, D.P.; Jackson, D.; Nazroo, J.; Pendleton, N.; Degens, H. Physical activity in older age: Perspectives for healthy ageing and frailty. Biogerontology 2016, 17, 567–580.
  5. Qiu, C.; Johansson, G.; Zhu, F.; Kivipelto, M.; Winblad, B. Prevention of cognitive decline in old age—Varying effects of interventions in different populations. Ann. Transl. Med. 2019, 7, S142.
  6. Barber, S.J.; Hamel, K.; Ketcham, C.; Lui, K.; Taylor-Ketcham, N. The effects of stereotype threat on older adults’ walking performance as a function of task difficulty and resource evaluations. Psychol. Aging 2020, 35, 250.
  7. Ćwirlej-Sozańska, A.; Wiśniowska-Szurlej, A.; Wilmowska-Pietruszyńska, A.; Sozański, B. Determinants of ADL and IADL disability in older adults in southeastern Poland. BMC Geriatr. 2019, 19, 1–13.
  8. Guimarães, V.; Pereira, A.; Oliveira, E.; Carvalho, A.; Peixoto, R. Design and evaluation of an exergame for motor-cognitive training and fall prevention in older adults. In Proceedings of the 4th EAI International Conference on Smart Objects and Technologies for Social Good, Bologna, Italy, 28–30 November 2018; pp. 202–207.
  9. World Health Organization. WHO Global Report on Falls Prevention in Older Age; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
  10. Scuffham, P.; Chaplin, S.; Legood, R. Incidence and costs of unintentional falls in older people in the United Kingdom. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2003, 57, 740–744.
  11. Ravindran, R.M.; Kutty, V.R. Risk factors for fall-related injuries leading to hospitalization among community-dwelling older persons: A hospital-based case-control study in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India. Asia Pac. J. Public Health 2016, 28, 70S–76S.
  12. Jung, S.H.; Hwang, J.M.; Kim, C.H. Inversion Table Fall Injury, the Phantom Menace: Three Case Reports on Cervical Spinal Cord Injury. Healthcare 2021, 9, 492.
  13. Falls. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/falls (accessed on 20 May 2021).
  14. Lamb, S.E.; Jørstad-Stein, E.C.; Hauer, K.; Becker, C.; Prevention of Falls Network Europe and Outcomes Consensus Group. Development of a common outcome data set for fall injury prevention trials: The Prevention of Falls Network Europe consensus. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2005, 53, 1618–1622.
  15. Drake, S.A.; Conway, S.H.; Yang, Y.; Cheatham, L.S.; Wolf, D.A.; Adams, S.D.; Wade, C.E.; Holcomb, J.B. When falls become fatal—Clinical care sequence. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0244862.
  16. Kistler, B.M.; Khubchandani, J.; Jakubowicz, G.; Wilund, K.; Sosnoff, J. Peer reviewed: Falls and fall-related injuries among US adults aged 65 or older with chronic kidney disease. Prev. Chronic Dis. 2018, 15, E82.
  17. Barker, E.T.; Howard, A.L.; Villemaire-Krajden, R.; Galambos, N.L. The rise and fall of depressive symptoms and academic stress in two samples of university students. J. Youth Adolesc. 2018, 47, 1252–1266.
  18. Park, Y.; Paik, N.J.; Kim, K.; Jang, H.; Lim, J. Depressive Symptoms, Falls, and Fear of Falling in Old Korean Adults: The Korean Longitudinal Study on Health and Aging (KLoSHA). J. Frailty Aging 2017, 6, 144–147.
  19. Zhu, H.; Samtani, S.; Brown, R.; Chen, H. A deep learning approach for recognizing activity of daily living (ADL) for senior care: Exploiting interaction dependency and temporal patterns. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 2020, 45, 859–896.
  20. Saboor, A.; Ahmad, R.; Ahmed, W.; Kiani, A.K.; Moullec, Y.L.; Alam, M.M. On Research Challenges in Hybrid Medium-Access Control Protocols for IEEE 802.15.6 WBANs. IEEE Sens. J. 2019, 19, 8543–8555.
  21. Saboor, A.; Ahmad, R.; Ahmed, W.; Alam, M.M. A Unique Backoff Algorithm in IEEE 802.15.6 WBAN. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 88th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall), Chicago, IL, USA, 27–30 August 2018; pp. 1–5.
  22. Yu, X. Approaches and principles of fall detection for elderly and patient. In Proceedings of the HealthCom 2008-10th International Conference on e-health Networking, Applications and Services, Singapore, 7–9 July 2008; pp. 42–47.
  23. Mubashir, M.; Shao, L.; Seed, L. A survey on fall detection: Principles and approaches. Neurocomputing 2013, 100, 144–152.
  24. Igual, R.; Medrano, C.; Plaza, I. Challenges, issues and trends in fall detection systems. Biomed. Eng. Online 2013, 12, 1–24.
  25. Del Din, S.; Kirk, C.; Yarnall, A.J.; Rochester, L.; Hausdorff, J.M. Body-Worn Sensors for Remote Monitoring of Parkinson’s Disease Motor Symptoms: Vision, State of the Art, and Challenges Ahead. J. Parkinson’s Dis. 2021, 11, S35–S47.
  26. Delahoz, Y.S.; Labrador, M.A. Survey on fall detection and fall prevention using wearable and external sensors. Sensors 2014, 14, 19806–19842.
  27. Saboor, A.; Kask, T.; Kuusik, A.; Alam, M.M.; Le Moullec, Y.; Niazi, I.K.; Zoha, A.; Ahmad, R. Latest Research Trends in Gait Analysis Using Wearable Sensors and Machine Learning: A Systematic Review. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 167830–167864.
  28. Ren, L.; Peng, Y. Research of Fall Detection and Fall Prevention Technologies: A Systematic Review. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 77702–77722.
  29. Prakash, C.; Kumar, R.; Mittal, N. Recent developments in human gait research: Parameters, approaches, applications, machine learning techniques, datasets and challenges. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2018, 49, 1–40.
  30. Alaqtash, M.; Sarkodie-Gyan, T.; Yu, H.; Fuentes, O.; Brower, R.; Abdelgawad, A. Automatic classification of pathological gait patterns using ground reaction forces and machine learning algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Boston, MA, USA, 30 August–3 September 2011; pp. 453–457.
  31. Islam, M.M.; Tayan, O.; Islam, M.R.; Islam, M.S.; Nooruddin, S.; Kabir, M.N.; Islam, M.R. Deep Learning Based Systems Developed for Fall Detection: A Review. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 166117–166137.
  32. Muro-De-La-Herran, A.; Garcia-Zapirain, B.; Mendez-Zorrilla, A. Gait analysis methods: An overview of wearable and non-wearable systems, highlighting clinical applications. Sensors 2014, 14, 3362–3394.
  33. Rizk, H.; Yamaguchi, H.; Youssef, M.; Higashino, T. Gain without pain: Enabling fingerprinting-based indoor localization using tracking scanners. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, Seattle, WA, USA, 3–6 November 2020; pp. 550–559.
  34. Serra, R.; Knittel, D.; Di Croce, P.; Peres, R. Activity recognition with smart polymer floor sensor: Application to human footstep recognition. IEEE Sens. J. 2016, 16, 5757–5775.
  35. Singh, A.P.; Luhach, A.K.; Gao, X.Z.; Kumar, S.; Roy, D.S. Evolution of wireless sensor network design from technology centric to user centric: An architectural perspective. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2020, 16, 1550147720949138.
  36. De Miguel, K.; Brunete, A.; Hernando, M.; Gambao, E. Home camera-based fall detection system for the elderly. Sensors 2017, 17, 2864.
  37. Lou, Z.; Wang, L.; Jiang, K.; Wei, Z.; Shen, G. Reviews of wearable healthcare systems: Materials, devices and system integration. Mater. Sci. Eng. R. Rep. 2020, 140, 100523.
  38. Niknejad, N.; Ismail, W.B.; Mardani, A.; Liao, H.; Ghani, I. A comprehensive overview of smart wearables: The state of the art literature, recent advances, and future challenges. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2020, 90, 103529.
  39. Shahzad, A.; Kim, K. FallDroid: An automated smart-phone-based fall detection system using multiple kernel learning. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2018, 15, 35–44.
  40. Khan, M.A.; Saboor, A.; Kim, H.c.; Park, H. A Systematic Review of Location Aware Schemes in the Internet of Things. Sensors 2021, 21, 3228.
  41. Saboor, A.; Mustafa, A.; Ahmad, R.; Khan, M.A.; Haris, M.; Hameed, R. Evolution of Wireless Standards for Health Monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2019 9th Annual Information Technology, Electromechanical Engineering and Microelectronics Conference (IEMECON), Jaipur, India, 13–15 March 2019; pp. 268–272.
  42. Hemmatpour, M.; Ferrero, R.; Montrucchio, B.; Rebaudengo, M. A review on fall prediction and prevention system for personal devices: Evaluation and experimental results. Adv. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2019, 2019.
  43. Kim, T.H.; Choi, A.; Heo, H.M.; Kim, K.; Lee, K.; Mun, J.H. Machine learning-based pre-impact fall detection model to discriminate various types of fall. J. Biomech. Eng. 2019, 141.
  44. Wang, L.; Xue, Z.; Ezeana, C.F.; Puppala, M.; Chen, S.; Danforth, R.L.; Yu, X.; He, T.; Vassallo, M.L.; Wong, S.T. Preventing inpatient falls with injuries using integrative machine learning prediction: A cohort study. NPJ Digit. Med. 2019, 2, 1–7.
  45. Salleh, S.M.; mohd yusoff, a.h.; ngadimon, K.; Koh, C.Z. Neural Network Algorithm-based Fall Detection Modelling. Int. J. Integr. Eng. 2020, 12, 138–150.
  46. Kumar, V.C.; Ha, S.; Sawicki, G.; Liu, C.K. Learning a Control Policy for Fall Prevention on an Assistive Walking Device. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Paris, France, 31 May–31 August 2020; pp. 4833–4840.
  47. Sucerquia, A.; López, J.D.; Vargas-Bonilla, J.F. SisFall: A fall and movement dataset. Sensors 2017, 17, 198.
  48. Martínez-Villaseñor, L.; Ponce, H.; Brieva, J.; Moya-Albor, E.; Núñez-Martínez, J.; Peñafort-Asturiano, C. UP-fall detection dataset: A multimodal approach. Sensors 2019, 19, 1988.
  49. Caby, B.; Kieffer, S.; de Saint Hubert, M.; Cremer, G.; Macq, B. Feature extraction and selection for objective gait analysis and fall risk assessment by accelerometry. Biomed. Eng. Online 2011, 10, 1–19.
  50. Shawen, N.; Lonini, L.; Mummidisetty, C.K.; Shparii, I.; Albert, M.V.; Kording, K.; Jayaraman, A. Fall detection in individuals with lower limb amputations using mobile phones: Machine learning enhances robustness for real-world applications. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2017, 5, e151.
  51. Saleh, M.; Jeannès, R.L.B. Elderly fall detection using wearable sensors: A low cost highly accurate algorithm. IEEE Sens. J. 2019, 19, 3156–3164.
  52. Chen, K.H.; Yang, J.J.; Jaw, F.S. Accelerometer-based fall detection using feature extraction and support vector machine algorithms. Instrum. Sci. Technol. 2016, 44, 333–342.
  53. Dubois, A.; Mouthon, A.; Sivagnanaselvam, R.S.; Bresciani, J.P. Fast and automatic assessment of fall risk by coupling machine learning algorithms with a depth camera to monitor simple balance tasks. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2019, 16, 1–10.
  54. Mao, Z.; Wu, L.; Song, L.; Huang, D. Data Preprocessing and Kalman Filter Performance Improvement Method in Integrated Navigation Algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2019 Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Guangzhou, China, 27–30 July 2019; pp. 3416–3422.
  55. Ajerla, D.; Mahfuz, S.; Zulkernine, F. A real-time patient monitoring framework for fall detection. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2019, 2019.
  56. Zhang, J.; Xiong, Y.; Min, S. A new hybrid filter/wrapper algorithm for feature selection in classification. Anal. Chim. Acta 2019, 1080, 43–54.
  57. Bommert, A.; Sun, X.; Bischl, B.; Rahnenführer, J.; Lang, M. Benchmark for filter methods for feature selection in high-dimensional classification data. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2020, 143, 106839.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback