Sit-to-stand transfer is a common task that is challenging for older adults and others with musculoskeletal impairments. Associated joint torques and muscle activations have been analyzed two-dimensionally, neglecting possible three-dimensional (3D) compensatory movements in those who struggle with sit-to-stand transfer. Furthermore, how muscles accelerate an individual up and off the chair remains unclear; such knowledge could inform rehabilitation strategies. We examined muscle forces, muscleinduced accelerations, and interlimb muscle force differences during sit-to-stand transfer in young, healthy adults. Dynamic simulations were created using a custom 3D musculoskeletal model; static optimization and induced acceleration analysis were used to determine muscle forces and their induced accelerations, respectively. The gluteus maximus generated the largest force (2009.07 ± 277.31 N) and was a main contributor to forward acceleration of the center of mass (COM) (0.62 ± 0.18 m/s(2)), while the quadriceps opposed it. The soleus was a main contributor to upward (2.56 ± 0.74 m/s(2)) and forward acceleration of the COM (0.62 ± 0.33 m/s(2)). Interlimb muscle force differences were observed, demonstrating lower limb symmetry cannot be assumed during this task, even in healthy adults. These findings establish a baseline from which deficits and compensatory strategies in relevant populations (eg, elderly, osteoarthritis) can be identified.
With more than 29,000 OpenSim users, several musculoskeletal models with varying levels of complexity are available to study human gait. However, how different model parameters affect estimated joint and muscle function between models is not fully understood. The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of four OpenSim models (Gait2392, Lower Limb Model 2010, Full-Body OpenSim Model, and Full Body Model 2016) on gait mechanics and estimates of muscle forces and activations. Using OpenSim 3.1 and the same experimental data for all models, six young adults were scaled in each model, gait kinematics were reproduced, and static optimization estimated muscle function. Simulated measures differed between models by up to 6.5° knee range of motion, 0.012 Nm/Nm peak knee flexion moment, 0.49 peak rectus femoris activation, and 462 N peak rectus femoris force. Differences in coordinate system definitions between models altered joint kinematics, influencing joint moments. Muscle parameter and joint moment discrepancies altered muscle activations and forces. Additional model complexity yielded greater error between experimental and simulated measures; therefore, this study suggests Gait2392 is a sufficient model for studying walking in healthy young adults. Future research is needed to determine which model(s) is best for tasks with more complex motion.
Background Older adults and individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) often exhibit reduced locomotor function and altered muscle activity. Identifying age- and KOA-related changes to the modular control of gait may provide insight into the neurological mechanisms underlying reduced walking performance in these populations. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine if the modular control of walking differs between younger and older adults without KOA and adults with end-stage KOA. Methods Kinematic, kinetic, and electromyography data were collected from ten younger (23.5 ± 3.1 years) and ten older (63.5 ± 3.4 years) adults without KOA and ten adults with KOA (64.0 ± 4.0 years) walking at their self-selected speed. Separate non-negative matrix factorizations of 500 bootstrapped samples determined the number of modules required to reconstruct each participant’s electromyography. One-way Analysis of Variance tests assessed the effect of group on walking speed and the number of modules. Kendall rank correlations (τb) assessed the association between the number of modules and self-selected walking speed. Results The number of modules required in the younger adults (3.2 ± 0.4) was greater than in the individuals with KOA (2.3 ± 0.7; p = 0.002), though neither cohorts’ required number of modules differed significantly from the unimpaired older adults (2.7 ± 0.5; p ≥ 0.113). A significant association between module number and walking speed was observed (τb = 0.350, p = 0.021) and individuals with KOA walked significantly slower (0.095 ± 0.21 m/s) than younger adults (1.24 ± 0.15 m/s; p = 0.005). Individuals with KOA also exhibited altered module activation patterns and composition (which muscles are associated with each module) compared to unimpaired adults. Conclusion These findings suggest aging alone may not significantly alter modular control; however, the combined effects of knee osteoarthritis and aging may together impair the modular control of gait.
Two optimization techniques, static optimization (SO) and computed muscle control (CMC), are often used in OpenSim to estimate the muscle activations and forces responsible for movement. Although differences between SO and CMC muscle function have been reported, the accuracy of each technique and the combined effect of optimization and model choice on simulated muscle function is unclear. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively compare the SO and CMC estimates of muscle activations and forces during gait with the experimental data in the Gait2392 and Full Body Running models. In OpenSim (version 3.1), muscle function during gait was estimated using SO and CMC in 6 subjects in each model and validated against experimental muscle activations and joint torques. Experimental and simulated activation agreement was sensitive to optimization technique for the soleus and tibialis anterior. Knee extension torque error was greater with CMC than SO. Muscle forces, activations, and co-contraction indices tended to be higher with CMC and more sensitive to model choice. CMC’s inclusion of passive muscle forces, muscle activation-contraction dynamics, and a proportional-derivative controller to track kinematics contributes to these differences. Model and optimization technique choices should be validated using experimental activations collected simultaneously with the data used to generate the simulation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.