Analysis of shoulder compressive and shear forces during functional activities of daily life

Klemt, Christian; Prinold, Joe A.I.; Morgans, Sharon; Smith, Samuel H.L.; Nolte, Daniel; Reilly, Peter; Bull, Anthony M.J.

doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.03.006

Cited by 35 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Biomechanically, the shorter is the lever arm, the less is the load moment [14,26]. When a cortical screw is inserted to maintain the syndesmotic stability, the screw becomes the fulcrum.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Favored location of a stabilizing screw for syndesmotic diastasis: Recommendation based on clinical and theoretical considerations

Yeh

Lee

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Although ankle injuries are common, combined malleolar fractures and syndesmotic diastasis (SD) are relatively fewer. The optimal technique for syndesmotic stabilization has yet achieved consensus. The favored location of a stabilizing screw for SD was investigated clinically and theoretically. Methods For the 10-year period, 63 consecutive adult patients with combined injuries were retrospectively studied. After malleolar fractures were internally stabilized with screws and plates, stress tests were performed to re-confirm syndesmotic instability. The diastatic syndesmosis was stabilized with cortical screws under image intensifier guidance. In the present study, only patients with one syndesmotic screw (55 patients) were enrolled and divided into the trans-syndesmotic (TR) or the supra-syndesmotic (SU) group. Clinical and functional outcomes between the two groups were compared. The favored location was speculated consequently.Results Forty-eight patients were followed for at least one year (average, 1.8 years; range, 1.0-7.0 years). The TR group included 31 patients and the SU group, 17 patients. All clinical and functional comparisons were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Conclusions Although statistical comparison is insignificant, TR screw insertion possesses biomechanical and biological merits. Unable to reveal advantages of TR screw insertion in clinical and functional comparisons may be imputed to insufficient sample sizes and early screw removal. Practically, TR insertion of a screw with late removal (> 3 months) may be a better choice.

show abstract

“…Biomechanically, the shorter is the lever arm, the less is the load moment [14,26]. When a cortical screw is inserted to maintain the syndesmotic stability, the screw becomes the fulcrum.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The far is a screw from the point of load application (i.e. anteromedial aspect of the lateral malleolus), the bigger is its loading stresses [14]. In other words, a more proximally placed screw will sustain more bending and rotational stresses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Favored location of a stabilizing screw for syndesmotic diastasis: Recommendation based on clinical and theoretical considerations

Yeh

Lee

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All subjects were instructed to perform sixteen functional activities of daily living with three sets per activity ( Table 2). 28 Kinematic data collection was performed using a 10-camera optical motion tracking system (Vicon Motion Tracking System, Oxford, UK) with three load cells (Kistler Type 9286B, Kistler Instrument Corp., Winterthur, Switzerland).…”

Section: Experimental Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 For each subject, data were normalised based on maximum EMG signals during maximum voluntary contraction tests. 2 The muscle force predictions of the MRI-based and linearly scaled-generic models were analysed as described in Klemt et al 28 In brief, once the start and end point of each functional activity was established, the muscle forces and joint forces were quantified at each time point. Interpolation using a cubic spline function was used to allow comparison between measurements for different activities and trials by representing each of them by 100 time points.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Generic and Mri-based Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropometric Scaling of Anatomical Datasets for Subject-Specific Musculoskeletal Modelling of the Shoulder

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linear scaling of generic shoulder models leads to substantial errors in model predictions. Customisation of shoulder modelling through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) improves modelling outcomes, but model development is time and technology intensive. This study aims to validate 10 MRI-based shoulder models, identify the best combinations of anthropometric parameters for model scaling, and quantify the improvement in model predictions of glenohumeral loading through anthropometric scaling from this anatomical atlas. The shoulder anatomy was modelled using a validated musculoskeletal model (UKNSM). Ten subject-specific models were developed through manual digitisation of model parameters from high-resolution MRI. Kinematic data of 16 functional daily activities were collected using a 10-camera optical motion capture system. Subject-specific model predictions were validated with measured muscle activations. The MRI-based shoulder models show good agreement with measured muscle activations. A tenfold cross-validation using the validated personalised shoulder models demonstrates that linear scaling of anthropometric datasets with the most similar ratio of body height to shoulder width and from the same gender (p < 0.04) yields best modelling outcomes in glenohumeral loading. The improvement in model reliability is significant (p < 0.02) when compared to the linearly scaled-generic UKNSM. This study may facilitate the clinical application of musculoskeletal shoulder modelling to aid surgical decision-making.

show abstract

“…While it is understood that supraspinatus initiates abduction, the pull-up activity is essentially loaded adduction, where supraspinatus acts in the mid-range to keep the humeral head compressed into the glenoid fossa. 32 Additionally, proprioceptive Type IV mechanoreceptors within the rotator cuff muscles and tendons may also act in anticipation of pending initiation of motion. 28,33 In contrast to the results here, Youdas et al 4 found the reverse grip more effective at activating biceps brachii, compared to a front grip.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Avoiding high‐risk rotator cuff loading: Muscle force during three pull‐up techniques

Urbanczyk

Prinold

Reilly

et al. 2020

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heavily loaded overhead training tasks, such as pull-ups are an effective strength training and rehabilitation exercise requiring high muscle forces maintained over a large range of motion. This study used experiments and computational modeling to examine loading patterns during three different pull-up variants and highlighted risks to vulnerable musculoskeletal structures. Optical motion tracking and a force platform captured kinematics and kinetics of 11 male subjects with no history of shoulder pathology, during performance of three pull-up variants-pronated front grip, pronated wide grip, and supinated reverse grip. UK National Shoulder model (UKNSM) simulated biomechanics of the shoulder girdle. Muscle forces and activation patterns were analyzed by repeated measures ANOVA with post-hoc comparisons. Motor group recruitment was similar across all pull-up techniques, with upper limb depression occurring secondary to torso elevation. Stress-time profiles show significant differences in individual muscle patterns among the three pullup variants, with the most marked differences between wide grip and reverse grip. Comparing across techniques, latissimus dorsi was relatively more active in wide pull-ups (P < .01); front pull-ups favored activation of biceps brachii and brachialis (P < .02); reverse pull-ups displayed higher proportional rotator cuff activation (P < .01). Pull-ups promote stability of the shoulder girdle and activation of scapula stabilizers and performing pull-ups over their full range of motion is important as different techniques and phases emphasize different muscles. Shoulder rehabilitation and strength & conditioning programs should encourage incorporation of all three pull-up variants with systematic progression to provide greater global strengthening of the torso and upper limb musculature. K E Y W O R D S athletic training, biomechanics, motion analysis, musculoskeletal modeling, rehabilitation, shoulder 2206 | URBANCZYK et Al. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare that no financial or personal relationships with people or organizations have inappropriately influenced this work and that the results of the study are presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

show abstract

Analysis of shoulder compressive and shear forces during functional activities of daily life

Cited by 35 publications

References 43 publications

Favored location of a stabilizing screw for syndesmotic diastasis: Recommendation based on clinical and theoretical considerations

Favored location of a stabilizing screw for syndesmotic diastasis: Recommendation based on clinical and theoretical considerations

Anthropometric Scaling of Anatomical Datasets for Subject-Specific Musculoskeletal Modelling of the Shoulder

Avoiding high‐risk rotator cuff loading: Muscle force during three pull‐up techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About