These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Influence of musculotendon geometry variability in muscle forces and hip bone-on-bone forces during walking.
    Author: Martín-Sosa E, Martínez-Reina J, Mayo J, Ojeda J.
    Journal: PLoS One; 2019; 14(9):e0222491. PubMed ID: 31553756.
    Abstract:
    Inverse dynamics problems are usually solved in the analysis of human gait to obtain reaction forces and moments at the joints. However, these actions are not the actual forces and moments supported by the joint structure, because they do not consider the forces of the muscles acting across the joint. Therefore, to analyse bone-on bone forces it is necessary to estimate those muscle forces. Usually, this problem is addressed by means of optimization algorithms. One of the parameters required to solve this problem is the musculotendon geometry. These data are usually taken from cadavers or MRI data from several subjects, different from the analysed subject. Then, the model is scaled to the subject morphology. This procedure constitutes a source of error. The goals of this work were two. First, to perform a sensitivity analysis of the influence of muscle insertion locations on the muscle forces acting on the hip joint and on the hip joint bone-on-bone forces. Second, to compare the hip joint bone-on-bone forces during gait cycle obtained through muscle insertion locations taken from a musculoskeletal model template and a scaling procedure to those obtained from a subject-specific model using an MRI of the subject. The problem was solved using OpenSim. Results showed that anatomical variability should be analysed from two perspectives. One the one hand, throughout the gait cycle, in a global way. On the other hand, at a characteristic instant of the gait cycle. Variations of ±1 cm in the position of the attachment points of certain muscles caused variations of up to 14.21% in averaged deviation of the muscle forces and 58.96% in the peak force in the modified muscle and variations up to 57.23% in the averaged deviation of the muscle force and up to 117.23% in the peak force in the rest of muscles. Then, the influence of that variability on muscle activity patterns and hip bone-on-bone forces could be described more precisely. A biomechanical analysis of a subject-specific musculoskeletal model was carried out. Using MRI data, variations up to 5 cm in the location of the insertion points were introduced. These modifications showed significant differences between the baseline model and the customized model: within the range [-12%, 10%] for muscle forces and around 35% of body weight for hip bone-on-bone forces.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]