Reliability and Minimal Detectable Change Values for Predictions of Knee Forces during Gait and Stair Ascent Derived from the FreeBody Musculoskeletal Model of the Lower Limb

Abstract

FreeBody is a musculoskeletal model of the lower limb used to calculate predictions of muscle and joint contact forces. The validation of FreeBody has been described in a number of publications; however, its reliability has yet to be established. The purpose of this study was, therefore, to establish the test–retest reliability of FreeBody in a population of healthy adults in order to add support to previous and future research using FreeBody that demonstrates differences between cohorts after an intervention. We hypothesized that test–retest estimations of knee contact forces from FreeBody would demonstrate a high intra-class correlation. Kinematic and kinetic data from nine older participants (4 men: mean age = 63 ± 11 years; 5 women: mean age = 49 ± 4 years) performing level walking and stair ascent was collected on consecutive days and then analyzed using FreeBody. There was a good level of intra-session agreement between the waveforms for the individual trials of each activity during testing session 1 (R = 0.79–0.97). Similarly, overall there was a good inter-session agreement within subjects (R = 0.69–0.97) although some subjects showed better agreement than others. There was a high level of agreement between the group mean waveforms of the two sessions for all variables (R = 0.882–0.997). The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were very high for peak tibiofemoral joint contact forces (TFJ) and hamstring forces during gait, for peak patellofemoral joint contact forces and quadriceps forces during stair ascent and for peak lateral TFJ and the proportion of TFJ accounted for by the medial compartment during both tasks (ICC = 0.86–0.96). Minimal detectable change (MDC) of the peak knee forces during gait ranged between 0.43 and 1.53 × body weight (18–170% of the mean peak values). The smallest MDCs were found for medial TFJ share (4.1 and 5.8% for walking and stair ascent, respectively, or 4.8 and 6.7% of the mean peak values). In conclusion, the results of this study support the use of FreeBody to investigate the effect of interventions on muscle and joint contact forces at the cohort level, but care should be taken if using FreeBody at the subject level.

Deep Learning for Musculoskeletal Force Prediction

“…The contributions of two components, the knee abduction angle and the vertical component of the ground reaction force, fit with the well-established correlation between the external knee adduction moment, with which these two factors are themselves strongly correlated, and the medial knee joint reaction force. Incidentally, recent work supports the reliability of cohort-level modelling over that performed on the basis of measurements from individual subjects29.…”

Lower Extremity Stiffness in Collegiate Distance Runners Pre- and Post-Competition

“…The level of significance was set a priori at ≤ 0.05. Minimal detectable change (MDC) was calculated for k with a 95% level of confidence using methods previously described (Gardinier et al, 2013;Price et al, 2017).…”

Muscular coordination during vertical jumping

“…The mechanical data captured in this study was analysed using FreeBody [14][15][16][17][18] a publicly available musculoskeletal model of the lower limb. FreeBody permits the estimation of the muscle and joint contact forces seen during movement and has been extensively tested in terms of its sensitivity to key modelling assumptions [18][19][20][21], its validity [14,22,23] and its reliability [24]. Firstly, all the data was filtered with 5th order Woltring filter (cut-off frequency = 10 Hz).…”