Blunt impacts to the back: Biomechanical response for model development

Forman, Jason; Perry, Brandon J.; Henderson, Kyvory; Gjolaj, Joseph P.; Heltzel, Sara; Lessley, David; Riley, Patrick O.; Salzar, Robert S.; Walilko, Tim

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.06.035

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To focus on rib fractures, previous cadaveric biomechanical studies have reported failure tolerances for the ribs of older adults (61-99 years old) ranging between 16 N-165 N in a frontal motor vehicle collision (Agnew et al, 2015;Kang et al, 2020). During impacts to the back, which would be more similar to the loading characteristics of a SMT, forces to produce rib fractures ranged between 1690 N-7400 N (Forman et al, 2015) which are considerably larger than the forces observed in this study. Of note, the SMT forces observed in this study were measured at the clinician-participant and participanttable interfaces, whereas previous biomechanical studies measured the forces at the rib itself.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 50%

Characterization of thoracic spinal manipulation and mobilization forces in older adults

Funabashi

Son

Pecora

et al. 2021

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Spinal mobilization and spinal manipulation are common interventions used by manual therapists to treat musculoskeletal conditions in older adults. Their force-time characteristics applied to older adults' thoracic spine are important considerations for effectiveness and safety but remain unknown. This study aimed to describe the force-time characteristics of posterior-to-anterior spinal mobilization and manipulation delivered to older adults' thoracic spine. Methods: Twenty-one older adults (≥65 years) with no thoracic pain received posterior-to-anterior thoracic spinal mobilization and/or manipulation with the force characteristics a chiropractor deemed appropriate. Sixdegree-of-freedom load cells and an instrumented treatment table recorded the force characteristics of both interventions at the clinician-participant and participant-table interfaces, respectively. Preload force, total peak force, time to peak and loading rate were analyzed descriptively. Findings: Based on data from 18 adults (56% female; average: 70 years old), mean resultant spinal mobilization forces at the clinician-participant interface were: 220 ± 51 N during preload, 323 ± 67 N total peak force, and 312 ± 38 ms time to peak. At the participant-table interface, mobilization forces were 201 ± 50 N during preload, 296 ± 63 N total peak force, and 308 ± 44 ms time to peak. Mean resultant spinal manipulation forces at the clinician-participant interface were: 260 ± 41 N during preload, 470 ± 46 N total peak force, and 165 ± 28 ms time to peak. At the participant table interface, spinal manipulation forces were 236 ± 47 N during preload, 463 ± 57 N total peak force, and 169 ± 28 ms time to peak. Interpretation: Results suggest older adults experience unique, but comparable force-time characteristics during spinal mobilization and manipulation delivered to their thoracic spine compared to the ones delivered to younger adults described in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 50%

Characterization of thoracic spinal manipulation and mobilization forces in older adults

Funabashi

Son

Pecora

et al. 2021

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The impact loading to the T-spine resulted in gross chest compression and forced the T-spine into extension. For all three impact speed tests, the impact force response produced by the model fell within the upper and lower bounds of the experimental data (Forman et al, 2015). For the 5.5 m/s impact, the peak chest deflection was close to the lower bound of the experimental data (Figure 10B).…”

Section: Figure 8 | Model Setup For Table-top Loading Casessupporting

confidence: 57%

“…In our study, two sets of FSUs (T2-T4 and T7-T9) were simulated (Figure 2A) and compared with experimental testing results of flexion bending (Lopez-Valdes et al, 2011). In addition to the FSU level evaluation, the full torso response and change of spine angle of extension were validated by tests of rear hub impact loading (Forman et al, 2015) with a 97.5 kg impactor using three different velocities: 1.5, 3.0, and 5.5 m/s, shown in Figure 2B.…”

Section: Thoracic Intervertebral Joints Evaluation and Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation and Validation of Thorax Model Responses: A Hierarchical Approach to Achieve High Biofidelity for Thoracic Musculoskeletal System

Mukherjee

Caudillo

Forman

et al. 2021

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As one of the most frequently occurring injuries, thoracic trauma is a significant public health burden occurring in road traffic crashes, sports accidents, and military events. The biomechanics of the human thorax under impact loading can be investigated by computational finite element (FE) models, which are capable of predicting complex thoracic responses and injury outcomes quantitatively. One of the key challenges for developing a biofidelic FE model involves model evaluation and validation. In this work, the biofidelity of a mid-sized male thorax model has been evaluated and enhanced by a multi-level, hierarchical strategy of validation, focusing on injury characteristics, and model improvement of the thoracic musculoskeletal system. At the component level, the biomechanical responses of several major thoracic load-bearing structures were validated against different relevant experimental cases in the literature, including the thoracic intervertebral joints, costovertebral joints, clavicle, sternum, and costal cartilages. As an example, the thoracic spine was improved by accurate representation of the components, material properties, and ligament failure features at tissue level then validated based on the quasi-static response at the segment level, flexion bending response at the functional spinal unit level, and extension angle of the whole thoracic spine. At ribcage and full thorax levels, the thorax model with validated bony components was evaluated by a series of experimental testing cases. The validation responses were rated above 0.76, as assessed by the CORA evaluation system, indicating the model exhibited overall good biofidelity. At both component and full thorax levels, the model showed good computational stability, and reasonable agreement with the experimental data both qualitatively and quantitatively. It is expected that our validated thorax model can predict thorax behavior with high biofidelity to assess injury risk and investigate injury mechanisms of the thoracic musculoskeletal system in various impact scenarios. The relevant validation cases established in this study shall be directly used for future evaluation of other thorax models, and the validation approach and process presented here may provide an insightful framework toward multi-level validating of human body models.

show abstract

“…These ligaments function to affix, stabilize and allow some motion of the ribs on the thoracic vertebra at the costovertebral joint. Their presence helps with the load-bearing, protection, posture and scaffolding roles that the thoracic cage provides with their stabilization properties [14]. More so, they allow and limit movement of the ribs at the transverse joint to allow for maximum expansion of the thoracic cavity as needed for respiratory demand [11].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, there are other inflammatory and traumatic states that can affect the costovertebral ligaments. The most common state is straining of the costovertebral/costotransverse joint complexes as a result of hyperextension of the ligament [14]. This type of injury occurs after a sudden movement involving twisting, bending or overextension of the spine [1].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ligaments of the Costovertebral Joints including Biomechanics, Innervations, and Clinical Applications: A Comprehensive Review with Application to Approaches to the Thoracic Spine

Saker¹,

Graham²,

Nicholas³

et al. 2016

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few studies have examined the costovertebral joint and its ligaments in detail. Therefore, the following review was performed to better elucidate their anatomy, function and involvement in pathology. Standard search engines were used to find studies concerning the costovertebral joints and ligaments. These often-overlooked ligaments of the body serve important functions in maintaining appropriate alignment between the ribs and spine. With an increasing interest in minimally invasive approaches to the thoracic spine and an improved understanding of the function and innervation of these ligaments, surgeons and clinicians should have a good working knowledge of these structures.

show abstract

Blunt impacts to the back: Biomechanical response for model development

Cited by 11 publications

References 13 publications

Characterization of thoracic spinal manipulation and mobilization forces in older adults

Characterization of thoracic spinal manipulation and mobilization forces in older adults

Evaluation and Validation of Thorax Model Responses: A Hierarchical Approach to Achieve High Biofidelity for Thoracic Musculoskeletal System

Ligaments of the Costovertebral Joints including Biomechanics, Innervations, and Clinical Applications: A Comprehensive Review with Application to Approaches to the Thoracic Spine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About