Literature DB >> 17518274

Are patient-specific joint and inertial parameters necessary for accurate inverse dynamics analyses of gait?

Jeffrey A Reinbolt1, Raphael T Haftka, Terese L Chmielewski, Benjamin J Fregly.   

Abstract

Variations in joint parameter (JP) values (axis positions and orientations in body segments) and inertial parameter (IP) values (segment masses, mass centers, and moments of inertia) as well as kinematic noise alter the results of inverse dynamics analyses of gait. Three-dimensional linkage models with joint constraints have been proposed as one way to minimize the effects of noisy kinematic data. Such models can also be used to perform gait optimizations to predict post-treatment function given pre-treatment gait data. This study evaluates whether accurate patient-specific JP and IP values are needed in three-dimensional linkage models to produce accurate inverse dynamics results for gait. The study was performed in two stages. First, we used optimization analyses to evaluate whether patient-specific JP and IP values can be calibrated accurately from noisy kinematic data, and second, we used Monte Carlo analyses to evaluate how errors in JP and IP values affect inverse dynamics calculations. Both stages were performed using a dynamic, 27 degrees-of-freedom, full-body linkage model and synthetic (i.e., computer generated) gait data corresponding to a nominal experimental gait motion. In general, JP but not IP values could be found accurately from noisy kinematic data. Root-mean-square (RMS) errors were 3 degrees and 4 mm for JP values and 1 kg, 22 mm, and 74 500 kg * mm2 for IP values. Furthermore, errors in JP but not IP values had a significant effect on calculated lower-extremity inverse dynamics joint torques. The worst RMS torque error averaged 4% bodyweight * height (BW * H) due to JP variations but less than 0.25% (BW * H) due to IP variations. These results suggest that inverse dynamics analyses of gait utilizing linkage models with joint constraints should calibrate the model's JP values to obtain accurate joint torques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17518274      PMCID: PMC3608472          DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2006.889187

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0018-9294            Impact factor:   4.538


  23 in total

1.  The effect of segment parameter error on gait analysis results.

Authors:  D J Pearsall; P A Costigan
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 2.840

2.  Towards a realistic biomechanical model of the thumb: the choice of kinematic description may be more critical than the solution method or the variability/uncertainty of musculoskeletal parameters.

Authors:  Francisco J Valero-Cuevas; M Elise Johanson; Joseph D Towles
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.712

3.  Sensitivity of the results produced by the inverse dynamic analysis of a human stride to perturbed input data.

Authors:  Miguel P T Silva; Jorge A C Ambrósio
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.840

4.  An optimization algorithm for human joint angle time-history generation using external force data.

Authors:  Claudia Mazzà; Aurelio Cappozzo
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.934

5.  Repeatability of an optimised lower body model.

Authors:  I W Charlton; P Tate; P Smyth; L Roren
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.840

6.  Influence of body segments' parameters estimation models on inverse dynamics solutions during gait.

Authors:  Guillaume Rao; David Amarantini; Eric Berton; Daniel Favier
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2005-06-20       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  Methods for investigating the sensitivity of joint resultants to body segment parameter variations.

Authors:  J G Andrews; S P Mish
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 2.712

8.  The effect of variation in knee center location estimates on net knee joint moments.

Authors: 
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  1998-01-01       Impact factor: 2.840

9.  Selection of body segment parameters by optimization methods.

Authors:  C L Vaughan; J G Andrews; J G Hay
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1982-02       Impact factor: 2.097

Review 10.  Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry. Part 4: assessment of anatomical landmark misplacement and its effects on joint kinematics.

Authors:  Ugo Della Croce; Alberto Leardini; Lorenzo Chiari; Aurelio Cappozzo
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.840

View more
  16 in total

1.  Full-Body Musculoskeletal Model for Muscle-Driven Simulation of Human Gait.

Authors:  Apoorva Rajagopal; Christopher L Dembia; Matthew S DeMers; Denny D Delp; Jennifer L Hicks; Scott L Delp
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 4.538

2.  The Role of Knee Positioning and Range-of-Motion on the Closed-Stance Forehand Tennis Swing.

Authors:  Steven M Nesbit; Monika Serrano; Mike Elzinga
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

3.  Is my model good enough? Best practices for verification and validation of musculoskeletal models and simulations of movement.

Authors:  Jennifer L Hicks; Thomas K Uchida; Ajay Seth; Apoorva Rajagopal; Scott L Delp
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  Global sensitivity analysis of the joint kinematics during gait to the parameters of a lower limb multi-body model.

Authors:  Aimad El Habachi; Florent Moissenet; Sonia Duprey; Laurence Cheze; Raphaël Dumas
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 2.602

5.  A probabilistic approach to quantify the impact of uncertainty propagation in musculoskeletal simulations.

Authors:  Casey A Myers; Peter J Laz; Kevin B Shelburne; Bradley S Davidson
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 6.  Methodological factors affecting joint moments estimation in clinical gait analysis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Valentina Camomilla; Andrea Cereatti; Andrea Giovanni Cutti; Silvia Fantozzi; Rita Stagni; Giuseppe Vannozzi
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 2.819

7.  Design of Optimal Treatments for Neuromusculoskeletal Disorders using Patient-Specific Multibody Dynamic Models.

Authors:  Benjamin J Fregly
Journal:  Int J Comput Vis Biomech       Date:  2009-07-01

8.  Experimental recommendations for estimating lower extremity loading based on joint and activity.

Authors:  Todd J Hullfish; John F Drazan; Josh R Baxter
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2021-08-24       Impact factor: 2.789

9.  Optimal estimation of dynamically consistent kinematics and kinetics for forward dynamic simulation of gait.

Authors:  C David Remy; Darryl G Thelen
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.097

10.  Uncertainty in Limb Configuration Makes Minimal Contribution to Errors Between Observed and Predicted Forces in a Musculoskeletal Model of the Rat Hindlimb.

Authors:  Qi Wei; Dinesh K Pai; Matthew C Tresch
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 4.538

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.