The loads acting in knee joints must be known for improving joint replacement, surgical procedures, physiotherapy, biomechanical computer simulations, and to advise patients with osteoarthritis or fractures about what activities to avoid. Such data would also allow verification of test standards for knee implants. This work analyzes data from 8 subjects with instrumented knee implants, which allowed measuring the contact forces and moments acting in the joint. The implants were powered inductively and the loads transmitted at radio frequency. The time courses of forces and moments during walking, stair climbing, and 6 more activities were averaged for subjects with I) average body weight and average load levels and II) high body weight and high load levels. During all investigated activities except jogging, the high force levels reached 3,372–4,218N. During slow jogging, they were up to 5,165N. The peak torque around the implant stem during walking was 10.5 Nm, which was higher than during all other activities including jogging. The transverse forces and the moments varied greatly between the subjects, especially during non-cyclic activities. The high load levels measured were mostly above those defined in the wear test ISO 14243. The loads defined in the ISO test standard should be adapted to the levels reported here. The new data will allow realistic investigations and improvements of joint replacement, surgical procedures for tendon repair, treatment of fractures, and others. Computer models of the load conditions in the lower extremities will become more realistic if the new data is used as a gold standard. However, due to the extreme individual variations of some load components, even the reported average load profiles can most likely not explain every failure of an implant or a surgical procedure.

The external knee adduction moment is considered a surrogate measure for the medial tibiofemoral contact force and is commonly used to quantify the load reducing effect of orthopedic interventions. However, only limited and controversial data exist about the correlation between adduction moment and medial force. The objective of this study was to examine whether the adduction moment is indeed a strong predictor for the medial force by determining their correlation during gait. Instrumented knee implants with telemetric data transmission were used to measure tibiofemoral contact forces in nine subjects. Gait analyses were performed simultaneously to the joint load measurements. Skeletal kinematics, as well as the ground reaction forces and inertial parameters, were used as inputs in an inverse dynamics approach to calculate the external knee adduction moment. Linear regression analysis was used to analyze the correlation between adduction moment and medial force for the whole stance phase and separately for the early and late stance phase. Whereas only moderate correlations between adduction moment and medial force were observed throughout the whole stance phase (R2 = 0.56) and during the late stance phase (R2 = 0.51), a high correlation was observed at the early stance phase (R2 = 0.76). Furthermore, the adduction moment was highly correlated to the medial force ratio throughout the whole stance phase (R2 = 0.75). These results suggest that the adduction moment is a surrogate measure, well-suited to predicting the medial force ratio throughout the whole stance phase or medial force during the early stance phase. However, particularly during the late stance phase, moderate correlations and high inter-individual variations revealed that the predictive value of the adduction moment is limited. Further analyses are necessary to examine whether a combination of other kinematic, kinetic or neuromuscular factors may lead to a more reliable prediction of the force magnitude.

Combined knowledge of the functional kinematics and kinetics of the human body is critical for understanding a wide range of biomechanical processes including musculoskeletal adaptation, injury mechanics, and orthopaedic treatment outcome, but also for validation of musculoskeletal models. Until now, however, no datasets that include internal loading conditions (kinetics), synchronized with advanced kinematic analyses in multiple subjects have been available. Our goal was to provide such datasets and thereby foster a new understanding of how in vivo knee joint movement and contact forces are interlinked - and thereby impact biomechanical interpretation of any new knee replacement design. In this collaborative study, we have created unique kinematic and kinetic datasets of the lower limb musculoskeletal system for worldwide dissemination by assessing a unique cohort of 6 subjects with instrumented knee implants (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin) synchronized with a moving fluoroscope (ETH Zürich) and other measurement techniques (including whole body kinematics, ground reaction forces, video data, and electromyography data) for multiple complete cycles of 5 activities of daily living. Maximal tibio-femoral joint contact forces during walking (mean peak 2.74 BW), sit-to-stand (2.73 BW), stand-to-sit (2.57 BW), squats (2.64 BW), stair descent (3.38 BW), and ramp descent (3.39 BW) were observed. Internal rotation of the tibia ranged from 3° external to 9.3° internal. The greatest range of anterio-posterior translation was measured during stair descent (medial 9.3 ± 1.0 mm, lateral 7.5 ± 1.6 mm), and the lowest during stand-to-sit (medial 4.5 ± 1.1 mm, lateral 3.7 ± 1.4 mm). The complete and comprehensive datasets will soon be made available online for public use in biomechanical and orthopaedic research and development.

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

ObjectiveThe external knee adduction moment (EAM) is often considered a surrogate measure of the distribution of loads across the tibiofemoral joint during walking. This study was undertaken to quantify the relationship between the EAM and directly measured medial tibiofemoral contact forces (Fmed) in a sample of subjects across a spectrum of activities.MethodsThe EAM for 9 patients who underwent total knee replacement was calculated using inverse dynamics analysis, while telemetric implants provided Fmed for multiple repetitions of 10 activities, including walking, stair negotiation, sit-to-stand activities, and squatting. The effects of the factors “subject” and “activity” on the relationships between Fmed and EAM were quantified using mixed-effects regression analyses in terms of the root mean square error (RMSE) and the slope of the regression.ResultsAcross subjects and activities a good correlation between peak EAM and Fmed values was observed, with an overall R2 value of 0.88. However, the slope of the linear regressions varied between subjects by up to a factor of 2. At peak EAM and Fmed, the RMSE of the regression across all subjects was 35% body weight (%BW), while the maximum error was 127 %BW.ConclusionThe relationship between EAM and Fmed is generally good but varies considerably across subjects and activities. These findings emphasize the limitation of relying solely on the EAM to infer medial joint loading when excessive directed cocontraction of muscles exists and call for further investigations into the soft tissue–related mechanisms that modulate the internal forces at the knee.