2019
DOI: 10.1115/1.4043356
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Muscle-Tendon Unit Parameter Estimation of a Hill-Type Musculoskeletal Model Based on Experimentally Obtained Subject-Specific Torque Profiles

Abstract: The aim of this study was to generate a subject-specific musculoskeletal muscle model, based on isometric and isovelocity measurements of the whole lower extremity. A two-step optimization procedure is presented for optimizing the muscle-tendon parameters (MTPs) for isometric and isovelocity joint torque profiles. A significant improvement in the prediction of joint torque profiles for both the solely isometric and a combined isometric and dynamic method of optimization when compared to the standard scaling me… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, plausibly due to the very large ±20% range of variation of the TSL (compared to 2-9% used in the current study), Carbone and co-workers found TSL to be more influential than MIF in prediction of the muscle forces. Regarding technical challenges in subject-specific measurement of TSL in living subjects, the baseline values from the generic models are either directly used or adjusted such that the differences between experimental and model-based joint moments is minimized (Van Campen et al, 2014;Heinen et al, 2019). It is also possible to ignore the force-length characteristics of the muscle-tendon units in the static optimization procedure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, plausibly due to the very large ±20% range of variation of the TSL (compared to 2-9% used in the current study), Carbone and co-workers found TSL to be more influential than MIF in prediction of the muscle forces. Regarding technical challenges in subject-specific measurement of TSL in living subjects, the baseline values from the generic models are either directly used or adjusted such that the differences between experimental and model-based joint moments is minimized (Van Campen et al, 2014;Heinen et al, 2019). It is also possible to ignore the force-length characteristics of the muscle-tendon units in the static optimization procedure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The HMM was used to model a single muscle, which was often expressed as muscle-tendon unit (MTU) and was mainly composed of three parts: contractile element (CE), parallel element (PEE), and series element (SEE) [ 16 ]. CE refers to the active force generated by the action within the muscle; PEE refers to the passive tension generated within the muscle; SEE refers to the elastic tendon tissue that connects the muscle to the bone.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The advantage of torque-driven models over muscle-driven models-that individual-specific maximal strength parameters can be determined in vivo-is therefore only true for twodimensional representations. This has resulted in a divided approach to methodological advancement in the simulation modeling community: incorporating effects of nonplanar movements by increasing the complexity of torque-driven models [118]; or improving the individual-specificity of parameters within muscle-driven models [100][101][102]119].…”
Section: Strength Constraintsmentioning
confidence: 99%