Direct in vivo tendon force measurement system

An, Kai Nan; Berglund, Lawrence J.; Cooney, William P.; Chao, Edmund Y.S.; Kovacevic, N

doi:10.1016/0021-9290(90)90384-f

Cited by 62 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Sartorial fascia covering hamstring tendons was cut to expose the G tendon with two incisions: (i) parallel to G tendon and (ii) parallel to longitudinal axis of the tibia. Subsequently, a buckle force transducer (NK Biotechnical Engineering Co., Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, for further details (An et al, 1990)) was mounted over the tendon. Note that prior to each experiment, the force transducer was (i) calibrated using bovine tendon strips (with rectangular cross section, dimensions approximating 7 Â 2 mm 2 , similar to human G distal tendon) and (ii) sterilized (using dry gas at maximally 50 1C).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lack of passive force data Both prior and subsequent to the tetanus, measurement of passive force was not possible: (1) the amplitude of the twitches evoked before the tetanus appears to be not high enough to remove the G tendon slack. (2) Since the tendon buckles during unloading, the force transducers working on a principle of torque measurement (An et al, 1990) measure negative forces, not representative of the passive state after the tetanus was ceased. In new studies, successful passive data collection could be possible by either increasing the twitch current amplitude or by measuring passive force-joint angle relationship separately.…”

Section: Limitations and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measurement of human Gracilis muscle isometric forces as a function of knee angle, intraoperatively

Yücesoy

Ateş

Akgün

et al. 2010

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitations and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of human Gracilis muscle isometric forces as a function of knee angle, intraoperatively

Yücesoy

Ateş

Akgün

et al. 2010

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In vitro dynamic tests of the tendon transducer, in which a tapping-like load (21) was applied to the tendon, indicated that the bandwidth of the system is greater than 50 Hz. After the subject flexed the long finger 10 times to seat the transducer onto the tendon, the tendon thickness was measured in situ for use in the transducer calibration facte (2,8). The subject's forearm was rotated 90°f rom full supination toward a neutral forearm posture with the thumb upward and the palm toward the feet.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vivo finger flexor tendon force while tapping on a keyswitch

Dennerlein

Diao

Mote

et al. 1999

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryForce may be a risk factor for musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity associated with typing and keying. However, the internal finger flexor tendon forces and their relationship to fingertip forces during rapid tapping on a keyswitch have not yet been measured in vivo. During the open carpal tunnel release surgery of five human subjects, a tendon-force transducer was inserted on the flexor digitorum super-ficialis of the long finger. During surgery, subjects tapped with the long finger on a computer keyswitch, instrumented with a keycap load cell. The average tendon maximum forces during a keystroke ranged from 8.3 to 16.6 N (mean = 12.9 N, SD = 3.3 N) for the subjects, four to seven times larger than the maximum forces observed at the fingertip. Tendon forces estimated from an isometric tendon-force model were only one to two times larger than tip force, significantly less than the observed tendon forces (p = 0.001). The force histories of the tendon during a keystroke were not proportional to fingertip force. First, the tendon-force histories did not contain the highfrequency fingertip force components observed as the tip impacts with the end of key travel. Instead, tendon tension during a keystroke continued to increase throughout the impact. Second, following the maximum keycap force, tendon tension during a keystroke decreased more slowly than fingertip force, remaining elevated approximately twice as long as the fingertip force. The prolonged elevation of tendon forces may be the result of residual eccentric muscle contraction or passive muscle forces, or both, which are additive to increasing extensor activity during the release phase of the keystroke.Although the rate of injury to the tendons at the wrist and adjacent tissues associated with repetitive work is reported to be high (55% of all work-related repetitive motion disorders [6]), the injury mechanisms are not well understood. Along with motion, posture, and vibration, the force exerted during a repetitive task is a risk factor for tendon-related disorders (4,19,23). Understanding how force is transmitted from the site of external application (fingertip) to the internal tissue (finger flexor tendons) is critical to understanding the mechanics of repetitive motion disorders. This understanding determines how the internal biological tissues support an externally applied force, and such knowledge identifies tendons that are exposed to higher forces. The knowledge of in vivo tendon tension also guides techniques of tendon repair, procedures for rehabilitation (15,22), and design of joint replacements (25). Rempel et al. (21) and Martin et al. (18) have measured exposure to force during keyboard work. The fingertip force history during a keystroke contains three distinct phases: (I) the keyswitch compression, (II) the high frequency component during finger impact at the end of keycap motion, and (III) the compression and release of the fingertip (21). Currently, applied fingertip loads and finger postures are used as the input or ind...

show abstract

“…three DOF), then the role of the MCL, and not the ACL was more dominant. It can be difficult to compare results between different studies as the degrees of freedom permitted during testing can have a significant effect on the outcome (Ahmed et al, 1992(Ahmed et al, , 1987An et al, 1990;Barry and Ahmed, 1986;Lewis et al, 1989Lewis et al, , 1982.…”

Section: Article In Pressmentioning

confidence: 99%