Literature DB >> 16672899

Comparison of capacitive versus resistive joint contact stress sensors.

L Martinelli1, C Hurschler, D Rosenbaum.   

Abstract

Cartilage contact stress elevations might be associated with pain or other symptoms after malunited, incongruous intraarticular fractures. Studies identifying fractures with patterns of elevated contact stresses would help to ensure more appropriate choices of treatment. However, appropriate instrumentation for such studies is crucial. We tested two such systems, one capacitive and one resistive, under identical loading conditions presumed to occur in the ankle. We used a materials testing machine and customized-loading fixtures to measure force detection error, contact area error, repeatability, homogeneity, creep, and one-axis and two-axis bending artifacts. The loading regimen caused pressures up to 2.5 MPa. An error in force detection between -3% and +5% was observed with the capacitive sensor whereas an error between -12% and +20% was observed with the resistive sensor. Repeatability and homogeneity were greater for the capacitive sensor. Errors in contact area measurement were less than 2% for the resistive sensor and less than 6% for the capacitive sensor. The resistive sensor could not conform to spherical surfaces without crinkling. Creep artifact was observed with both sensors. We concluded that the capacitive sensor had superior performance even though its thickness and high compliance may be disadvantageous in intraarticular measurements. The resistive sensor is required for use where higher pressures are expected despite its inferior accuracy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16672899     DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000218730.59838.6a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  6 in total

1.  Does lateral release change patellofemoral forces and pressures?: a pilot study.

Authors:  Jeffrey I Peretz; Kim R Driftmier; Douglas L Cerynik; Neil S Kumar; Norman A Johanson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  In vitro measurement of intraarticular pressure in the ankle joint.

Authors:  Andreas Suckel; Otto Muller; Nikolaus Wachter; Torsten Kluba
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Decreased ratios of lateral to medial patellofemoral forces and pressures after lateral retinacular release and gender knees in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Joseph J King; Rajit Chakravarty; Douglas L Cerynik; Aaron Black; Norman A Johanson
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-09-28       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Changes in Chopart joint load following tibiotalar arthrodesis: in vitro analysis of 8 cadaver specimens in a dynamic model.

Authors:  A Suckel; O Muller; T Herberts; N Wulker
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2007-08-08       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  Use of Tekscan K-scan sensors for retropatellar pressure measurement avoiding errors during implantation and the effects of shear forces on the measurement precision.

Authors:  A Wilharm; Ch Hurschler; T Dermitas; M Bohnsack
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Closing the Wearable Gap-Part V: Development of a Pressure-Sensitive Sock Utilizing Soft Sensors.

Authors:  Tony Luczak; Reuben F Burch V; Brian K Smith; Daniel W Carruth; John Lamberth; Harish Chander; Adam Knight; J E Ball; R K Prabhu
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.576

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.