Validation of the Delft Shoulder and Elbow Model using in-vivo glenohumeral joint contact forces

Nikooyan, Ali Asadi; Veeger, H.E.J.; Westerhoff, P.; Graichen, F.; Bergmann, G.; Helm, F.C.T. van der

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.06.015

Cited by 110 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

134

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They showed that the shoulder joint contact force reached 1700 N (238 % of body weight) during forward flexion more than 90 degrees with 2 kg weight in the hand [28]. They also showed a reasonable compatibility between the shoulder joint contact force estimated by a musculoskeletal model and the measured force [29]. However, it was also discovered that the results based on the musculoskeletal model depend on the direction of force application and user's posture.…”

Section: Validity Of the Musculoskeletal Modelmentioning

confidence: 98%

Shoulder joint contact force during lever-propelled wheelchair propulsion

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to obtain quantitative results about shoulder contact force during wheelchair lever propulsion when the gear ratio of the lever propulsion mechanism is changing. The effect of the gear ratio on the shoulder contact force was investigated for few different wheelchair loading. For the experiments we designed a special mechatronic wheelchair simulator that allowed the simulation of different gear ratios of the wheelchair lever propulsion mechanism and simulation of different road inclinations. The same simulator was also used for simulation of a hand rim propelled wheelchair. We conducted also a handrim propulsion experiment and used the results from it for comparison with the lever propulsion data. Four nondisabled male adults with no prior wheeling experience participated in the experiment. In the first tests, a lever propelled wheelchair was simulated with the simulator. The target speed of the wheelchair was set to 2 km/h. For the test, the gear ratio was varied from 1.5 to 1/1.5. A load torque was applied to the rear wheels to imitate road inclinations of 0°, 2° and 4°. In the second part of the test, the simulator was structured to simulate a handrim propelled wheelchair. The participants were asked to keep the same speed (2 km/h) and the simulator was set sequentially to imitate climbing a ramp inclined on 0°, 2° and 4°. Kinematic data of the body were collected by a motion capture system. Kinetic data such as hand force and driving torque, were measured by instrumented wheels with incorporated six-axis force sensor. The intersegmental joint forces and moments were calculated from the obtained kinematic and kinetic data via inverse dynamics analysis procedure. Muscle forces were computed from the measured joint moments by using an optimization approach. Shoulder joint contact force, which indicates the joint surface loading, was computed as a synthetic vector of the intersegmental force for shoulder joint acquired from the inverse dynamics analysis and the compressive forces from muscles, tendons, ligaments and cartilages crossing the shoulder joint. It was observed that the decrease of the gear ratio causes increased cycle frequency and reduces the shoulder joint contact force. Result showed that the shoulder joint contact force during lever propulsion with a gear ratio 1/1.5 was up to 70 % lower than the shoulder joint contact force during handrim propulsion. The results from this study could be used in the design of new lever propulsion mechanisms that reduce the risks of secondary shoulder disorders and increase user's comfort.

show abstract

Section: Validity Of the Musculoskeletal Modelmentioning

confidence: 98%

Shoulder joint contact force during lever-propelled wheelchair propulsion

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the comprehensive muscle attachment and via point data from the reference model were morphed to the detailed, CT derived bone anatomy to obtain subject-specific descriptions of the muscle paths, this morphing approach (driven by the hard tissue anatomy) might not provide sufficient patient specificity to enable accurate muscle force predictions under all conditions, 56 even when combined with the muscle PCSA scaling. More specific representations of the patients' muscles, as could be obtained from MRI 57 or ultrasound, 58,59 were not available, and future analyses should aim to include such data.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Patellofemoral joint contact forces during activities with high knee flexion

Trepczynski

Kutzner

Kornaropoulos

et al. 2011

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The patellofemoral (PF) joint plays an essential role in knee function, but little is known about the in vivo loading conditions at the joint. We hypothesized that the forces at the PF joint exceed the tibiofemoral (TF) forces during activities with high knee flexion. Motion analysis was performed in two patients with telemetric knee implants during walking, stair climbing, sit-to-stand, and squat. TF and PF forces were calculated using a musculoskeletal model, which was validated against the simultaneously measured in vivo TF forces, with mean errors of 10% and 21% for the two subjects. The in vivo peak TF forces of 2.9-3.4 bodyweight (BW) varied little across activities, while the peak PF forces showed significant variability, ranging from less than 1 BW during walking to more than 3 BW during high flexion activities, exceeding the TF forces. Together with previous in vivo measurements at the hip and knee, the PF forces determined here provide evidence that peak forces across these joints reach values of around 3 BW during high flexion activities, also suggesting that the in vivo loading conditions at the knee can only be fully understood if the forces at the TF and the PF joints are considered together. ß

show abstract

“…It is therefore important to have an accurate estimation of stress and strain distributions close to the glenohumeral joint. As the joint reaction force is by far the largest force in the set of musculoskeletal loads applied on the scapula [29], the largest stress and strain values are generally Table 3. Error 2 and RMSE values calculated for different combinations of uncertainty in the components of the perturbed models (flexion movement).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We used a patient-specific large-scale musculoskeletal model of the upper extremity, namely the Delft shoulder and elbow model (DSEM), for estimating the detailed musculoskeletal modelling of the scapula. This model has been validated against experimental measurements of the joint force using instrumented shoulder implants [29]. As previously mentioned, the entire set of soft-and hard-tissue parameters that are needed for musculoskeletal modelling of the upper extremity were measured for this particular donor.…”

Section: The Reference Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of densitometry, material mapping and load estimation uncertainties on the accuracy of patient-specific finite-element models of the scapula

Campoli

Bolsterlee

Helm

et al. 2014

J. R. Soc. Interface.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-specific biomechanical models including patient-specific finite-element (FE) models are considered potentially important tools for providing personalized healthcare to patients with musculoskeletal diseases. A multi-step procedure is often needed to generate a patient-specific FE model. As all involved steps are associated with certain levels of uncertainty, it is important to study how the uncertainties of individual components propagate to final simulation results. In this study, we considered a specific case of this problem where the uncertainties of the involved steps were known and the aim was to determine the uncertainty of the predicted strain distribution. The effects of uncertainties of three important components of patient-specific models, including bone density, musculoskeletal loads and the parameters of the material mapping relationship on the predicted strain distributions, were studied. It was found that the number of uncertain components and the level of their uncertainty determine the uncertainty of simulation results. The 'average' uncertainty values were found to be relatively small even for high levels of uncertainty in the components of the model. The 'maximum' uncertainty values were, however, quite high and occurred in the areas of the scapula that are of the greatest clinical relevance. In addition, the uncertainty of the simulation result was found to be dependent on the type of movement analysed, with abduction movements presenting consistently lower uncertainty values than flexion movements.

show abstract

Validation of the Delft Shoulder and Elbow Model using in-vivo glenohumeral joint contact forces

Cited by 110 publications

References 38 publications

Shoulder joint contact force during lever-propelled wheelchair propulsion

Shoulder joint contact force during lever-propelled wheelchair propulsion

Patellofemoral joint contact forces during activities with high knee flexion

Effects of densitometry, material mapping and load estimation uncertainties on the accuracy of patient-specific finite-element models of the scapula

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About