Soft tissue artifact causes underestimation of hip joint kinematics and kinetics in a rigid-body musculoskeletal model

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS

卷:108

Article

Fiorentino, Niccolo M.^1,2  Atkins, Penny R.^1,3  Kutschke, Michael J.¹  Foreman, K. Bo^1,4  Anderson, Andrew E.^1,3,5 

[1] Univ Utah, Dept Orthopaed, 590 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84108 USA

[2] Univ Vermont, Dept Mech Engn, 33 Colchester Ave, Burlington, VT 05403 USA

[3] Univ Utah, Dept Bioengn, 36 S Wasatch Dr,Room 3100, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 USA

[4] Univ Utah, Dept Phys Therapy, 520 Wakara Way,Suite 240, Salt Lake City, UT 84108 USA

[5] Univ Utah, Sci Comp & Imaging Inst, 72 S Cent Campus Dr,Room 3750, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 USA

关键词: Musculoskeletal model;    Motion capture;    Simulation;    Gait;    X-ray;   

DOI  :  10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.109890

来源: Elsevier

【 摘 要 】

Rigid body musculoskeletal models have been applied to study kinematics, moments, muscle forces, and joint reaction forces in the hip. Most often, models are driven with segment motions calculated through optical tracking of markers adhered to the skin. One limitation of optical tracking is soft tissue artifact (STA), which occurs due to motion of the skin surface relative to the underlying skeleton. The purpose of this study was to quantify differences in musculoskeletal model outputs when tracking body segment positions with skin markers as compared to bony landmarks measured by direct imaging of bone motion with dual fluoroscopy (DF). Eleven asymptomatic participants with normally developed hip anatomy were imaged with DF during level treadmill walking at a self-selected speed. Hip joint kinematics and kinetics were generated using inverse kinematics, inverse dynamics, static optimization and joint reaction force analysis. The effect of STA was assessed by comparing the difference in estimates from simulations based on skin marker positions (SM) versus virtual markers on bony landmarks from DF. While patterns were similar, STA caused underestimation of kinematics, range of motion (ROM), moments, and reaction forces at the hip, including flexion-extension ROM, maximum internal rotation joint moment and peak joint reaction force magnitude. Still, kinetic differences were relatively small, and thus they may not be relevant nor clinically meaningful. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

【 授权许可】

Free