Literature DB >> 20392450

Sensitivity of dynamic simulations of gait and dynamometer experiments to hill muscle model parameters of knee flexors and extensors.

F De Groote1, A Van Campen, I Jonkers, J De Schutter.   

Abstract

We assessed and compared sensitivities of dynamic simulations to musculotendon (MT) parameters for gait and dynamometer experiments. Our aim with this comparison was to investigate whether dynamometer experiments could provide information about MT-parameters that are important to reliably study MT-function during gait. This would mean that dynamometer experiments could be used to estimate these parameters. Muscle contribution to the joint torque (MT-torque) rather than relative MT-force primarily affects the resulting gait pattern and torque measured by the dynamometer. In contrast to recent studies, therefore, we assessed the sensitivity of the MT-torque, rather than the sensitivity of the relative MT-force. Based on sensitivity of the MT-torque to a parameter perturbation, MT-parameters of the knee flexors and extensors were classified in three categories: low, medium, and high. For gait, classification was based on the average sensitivity during a gait cycle. For isometric and isokinetic dynamometer experiments, classification was based on the highest sensitivity found in the experiments. The calculated muscle contributions to the knee torque during gait and dynamometer experiments had a high sensitivity to only a limited number of MT-parameters of the knee flexors and extensors, suggesting that not all MT-parameters need to be estimated. In general, the highest sensitivity was found for tendon slack length. However, for some muscles the sensitivity to the optimal fibre length or the maximal isometric muscle force was also high or medium. The classification of the individual MT-parameters for gait and dynamometer experiments was largely similar. We therefore conclude that dynamometer experiments provide information about MT-parameters important to reliably study MT-function during gait, so that subject-specific estimates of MT-parameters could be made based on dynamometer experiments. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20392450     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.03.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  15 in total

1.  Prediction of In Vivo Knee Joint Loads Using a Global Probabilistic Analysis.

Authors:  Alessandro Navacchia; Casey A Myers; Paul J Rullkoetter; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  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

3.  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

4.  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

5.  Computational modelling of muscle fibre operating ranges in the hindlimb of a small ground bird (Eudromia elegans), with implications for modelling locomotion in extinct species.

Authors:  Peter J Bishop; Krijn B Michel; Antoine Falisse; Andrew R Cuff; Vivian R Allen; Friedl De Groote; John R Hutchinson
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.475

6.  Personalized neuromusculoskeletal modeling to improve treatment of mobility impairments: a perspective from European research sites.

Authors:  Benjamin J Fregly; Michael L Boninger; David J Reinkensmeyer
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 4.262

7.  Are subject-specific musculoskeletal models robust to the uncertainties in parameter identification?

Authors:  Giordano Valente; Lorenzo Pitto; Debora Testi; Ajay Seth; Scott L Delp; Rita Stagni; Marco Viceconti; Fulvia Taddei
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Elucidating Sensorimotor Control Principles with Myoelectric Musculoskeletal Models.

Authors:  Sarah E Goodman; Christopher J Hasson
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-11-10       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Influence of passive muscle tension on electromechanical delay in humans.

Authors:  Lilian Lacourpaille; François Hug; Antoine Nordez
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Differences between joint-space and musculoskeletal estimations of metabolic rate time profiles.

Authors:  Arash Mohammadzadeh Gonabadi; Prokopios Antonellis; Philippe Malcolm
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.