Several three-dimensional (3D) lower-limb musculo-skeletal models have been developed for gait analysis and different hip, knee and ankle joint models have been considered in the literature. Conversely to the influence of the musculo-tendon geometry, the influence of the joint models - i.e. number of degrees of freedom and passive joint moments - on the estimated musculo-tendon forces and 3D joint reaction forces has not been extensively examined.
In this paper musculo-tendon forces and 3D joint reaction forces have been estimated for one subject and one gait cycle with nine variations of a musculoskeletal model and outputs have been compared to measured electromyographic signals and knee joint contact forces. The model outputs are generally in line with the measured signals. However, the 3D joint reaction forces were higher than published values and the contact forces measured for the subject. The results of this study show that, with more degrees of freedom in the model, the musculo-tendon forces and the 3D joint reaction forces tend to increase but with some redistribution between the muscles. In addition, when taking into account passive joint moments, the 3D joint reaction forces tend to decrease during the stance phase and increase during the swing phase.
Although further investigations are needed, a five-degree-of-freedom lower-limb musculo-skeletal model with some angle-dependent joint coupling and stiffness seems to provide satisfactory musculo-tendon forces and 3D joint reaction forces.
ErdemirAMcleanSHerzogWVan den BogertAJ. Model-based estimation of muscle forces exerted during movements. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)2007; 22(2): 131–154.
2.
PandyMG. Computer modeling and simulation of human movement. Ann Rev Biomed Engng2001; 3: 245–273.
3.
PiazzaSJ. Muscle-driven forward dynamic simulations for the study of normal and pathological gait. J Neuroengng Rehabil2006; 3: 5.
4.
ZajacFE. Understanding muscle coordination of the human leg with dynamical simulations. J Biomech2002; 35(8): 1011–1018.
5.
SeiregAArvikarRJ. The prediction of muscular load sharing and joint forces in the lower extremities during walking. J Biomech1975; 8(2): 89–102.
6.
HardtDE. Determining muscle forces in the leg during normal human walking—an application and evaluation of optimization methods. J Biomech Engng1978; 100(2): 72–78.
7.
CrowninshieldRDBrandRA. A physiologically based criterion of muscle force prediction in locomotion. J Biomech1981; 14(11): 793–801.
8.
PatriarcoAGMannRWSimonSRMansourJM. An evaluation of the approaches of optimization models in the prediction of muscle forces during human gait. J Biomech1981; 14(8): 513–525.
9.
RohrleHScholtenRSigolottoC. Joint forces in the human pelvis-leg skeleton during walking. J Biomech1984; 17(6): 409–424.
10.
PierrynowskiMRMorrisonJB. Estimating the muscle forces generated in the human lower extremity when walking: a physiological solution. Math Biosci1985; 75(1): 43–68.
11.
DudaGNSchneiderEChaoEY. Internal forces and moments in the femur during walking. J Biomech1997; 30(9): 933–941.
12.
GlitschUBaumannW. The three-dimensional determination of internal loads in the lower extremity. J Biomech1997; 30(11-12): 1123–1131.
13.
AndersonFCPandyMG. Dynamic optimization of human walking. J Biomech Engng2001; 123(5): 381–390.
14.
NeptuneRRKautzSAZajacFE. Contributions of the individual ankle plantar flexors to support, forward progression and swing initiation during walking. J Biomech2001; 34(11): 1387–1398.
15.
HellerMOBergmannGDeuretzbacherG. Musculo-skeletal loading conditions at the hip during walking and stair climbing. J Biomech2001; 34(7): 883–893.
16.
StansfieldBWNicolACPaulJP. Direct comparison of calculated hip joint contact forces with those measured using instrumented implants. An evaluation of a three-dimensional mathematical model of the lower limb. J Biomech2003; 36(7): 929–936.
17.
KimmelSASchwartzMH. A baseline of dynamic muscle function during gait. Gait Post2006; 23(2): 211–221.
18.
LenaertsGDe GrooteFDemeulenaereB. Subject-specific hip geometry affects predicted hip joint contact forces during gait. J Biomech2008; 41(6): 1243–1252.
19.
De GrooteFPipeleersGJonkersI. A physiology based inverse dynamic analysis of human gait: potential and perspectives. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engng2009; 12(5): 563–574.
20.
FraysseFDumasRChezeLWangX. Comparison of global and joint-to-joint methods for estimating the hip joint load and the muscle forces during walking. J Biomech2009; 42(14): 2357–2362.
21.
WehnerTClaesLSimonU. Internal loads in the human tibia during gait. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)2009; 24(3): 299–302.
22.
Al NazerRRantalainenTHeinonenA. Flexible multibody simulation approach in the analysis of tibial strain during walking. J Biomech2008; 41(5): 1036–1043.
23.
DelpSLLoanJPHoyMG. An interactive graphics-based model of the lower extremity to study orthopaedic surgical procedures. IEEE Trans Biomed Engng1990; 37(8): 757–767.
24.
ArnoldEMWardSRLieberRLDelpSL. A model of the lower limb for analysis of human movement. Ann Biomed Engng2010; 38(2): 269–279.
25.
Klein HorsmanMDKoopmanHFVan der HelmFC. Morphological muscle and joint parameters for musculoskeletal modelling of the lower extremity. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)2007; 22(2): 239–247.
26.
BrandRAPedersenDRFriederichJA. The sensitivity of muscle force predictions to changes in physiologic cross-sectional area. J Biomech1986; 19(8): 589–596.
27.
XiaoMHigginsonJ. Sensitivity of estimated muscle force in forward simulation of normal walking. J Appl Biomech2010; 26(2): 142–149.
28.
RedlCGfoehlerMPandyMG. Sensitivity of muscle force estimates to variations in muscle-tendon properties. Hum Mov Sci2007; 26(2): 306–319.
29.
AndersonFCPandyMG. Individual muscle contributions to support in normal walking. Gait Post2003; 17(2): 159–169.
30.
ArnoldASAndersonFCPandyMGDelpSL. Muscular contributions to hip and knee extension during the single limb stance phase of normal gait: a framework for investigating the causes of crouch gait. J Biomech2005; 38(11): 2181–2189.
31.
LiuMQAndersonFCPandyMGDelpSL. Muscles that support the body also modulate forward progression during walking. J Biomech2006; 39(14): 2623–2630.
32.
GoldbergSRKeppleTM. Muscle-induced accelerations at maximum activation to assess individual muscle capacity during movement. J Biomech2009; 42(7): 952–955.
33.
KeppleTMSiegelKLStanhopeSJ. Relative contributions of the lower extremity joint moments to forward progression and support during gait. Gait Post1997; 6: 1–8.
34.
PatelMTalatyMOunpuuS. The impact of adding trunk motion to the interpretation of the role of joint moments during normal walking. J Biomech2007; 40(16): 3563–3569.
SiegelKLKeppleTMStanhopeSJ. Using induced accelerations to understand knee stability during gait of individuals with muscle weakness. Gait Post2006; 23(4): 435–440.
37.
GoldbergEJRequejoPSFowlerEG. Joint moment contributions to swing knee extension acceleration during gait in children with spastic hemiplegic cerebral palsy. J Biomech2010; 43(5): 893–899.
38.
GoldbergEJRequejoPSFowlerEG. Joint moment contributions to swing knee extension acceleration during gait in individuals with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy. Gait Post2010; 33(1): 66–70.
39.
NottCRZajacFENeptuneRRKautzSA. All joint moments significantly contribute to trunk angular acceleration. J Biomech2010; 43(13): 2648–2652.
LuTWO’ConnorJJ. Bone position estimation from skin marker co-ordinates using global optimisation with joint constraints. J Biomech1999; 32(2): 129–134.
42.
DupreySChezeLDumasR. Influence of joint constraints on lower limb kinematics estimation from skin markers using global optimization. J Biomech2010; 43(14): 2858–2862.
43.
SholukhaVLeardiniASalviaP. Double-step registration of in vivo stereophotogrammetry with both in vitro 6-dofs electrogoniometry and CT medical imaging. J Biomech2006; 39(11): 2087–2095.
44.
ReinboltJASchutteJFFreglyBJ. Determination of patient-specific multi-joint kinematic models through two-level optimization. J Biomech2005; 38(3): 621-626.
45.
De GrooteFDe LaetTJonkersIDe SchutterJ. Kalman smoothing improves the estimation of joint kinematics and kinetics in marker-based human gait analysis. J Biomech2008; 41(16): 3390–3398.
46.
LiGKawamuraKBarranceP. Prediction of muscle recruitment and its effect on joint reaction forces during knee exercises. Ann Biomed Engng1998; 26(4): 725–733.
47.
XiaoMHigginsonJS. Muscle function may depend on model selection in forward simulation of normal walking. J Biomech2008; 41(15): 3236–3242.
48.
PandyMGSasakiKKimS. A three-dimensional musculoskeletal model of the human knee joint. Part 1: theoretical construct. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engng1997; 1(2): 87–108.
49.
ShelburneKBPandyMGAndersonFCTorryMR. Pattern of anterior cruciate ligament force in normal walking. J Biomech2004; 37(6): 797–805.
50.
CleatherDJBullAM. An optimization-based simultaneous approach to the determination of muscular, ligamentous, and joint contact forces provides insight into musculoligamentous interaction. Ann Biomed Engng2011; 39(7): 1925–1934
51.
SaraswatPAndersenMSMacWilliamsBA. A musculoskeletal foot model for clinical gait analysis. J Biomech2010; 43(9): 1645–1652.
52.
CleatherDJBullAMJ. Lower-extremity musculoskeletal geometry affects the calculation of patellofemoral forces in vertical jumping and weightlifting. Proc imeche, Part H: J Engng Med2010; 224(9): 1073–1083.
53.
PrilutskyBIZatsiorskyVM. Optimization-based models of muscle coordination. Exerc Sport Sci Rev2002; 30(1): 32–38.
54.
CollinsJJ. The redundant nature of locomotor optimization laws. J Biomech1995; 28(3): 251–267.
55.
RaikovaRT. Investigation of the influence of the elbow joint reaction on the predicted muscle forces using different optimization functions. J Musculoskelet Res2009; 12(1): 31–43.
56.
JinhaAAit-HaddouRHerzogW. Predictions of co-contraction depend critically on degrees-of-freedom in the musculoskeletal model. J Biomech2006; 39(6): 1145–1152.
57.
KoehleMJHullML. The effect of knee model on estimates of muscle and joint forces in recumbent pedaling. J Biomech Engng2010; 132(1): 011007.
58.
CleatherDJBullAMJ. Knee and hip joint forces - sensitivity to the degrees of freedom classification at the knee. Proc imeche, Part H: J Engng Med2011; 225(6): 621–626.
59.
AmankwahKTrioloRKirschRAuduM. A model-based study of passive joint properties on muscle effort during static stance. J Biomech2006; 39(12): 2253–2263.
60.
MoissenetF. Modélisation musculo-squelettique : vers un modèle plus proche de la clinique. Phd Thesis, Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France, 2011.
61.
DumasRChezeL. 3D inverse dynamics in non-orthonormal segment coordinate system. Med Biol Engng Comput2007; 45(3): 315–322.
62.
GarciadeJalonJUndaJAvelloA. Natural coordinates for the computer analysis of multibody systems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Engng1986; 56(3): 309–327.
63.
Di GregorioRParenti-CastelliVO’ConnorJJLeardiniA. Mathematical models of passive motion at the human ankle joint by equivalent spatial parallel mechanisms. Med Biol Engng Comput2007; 45(3): 305–313.
64.
FeikesJDO’ConnorJJZavatskyAB. A constraint-based approach to modelling the mobility of the human knee joint. J Biomech2003; 36(1): 125–129.
65.
AndersonFC. A dynamic optimization solution for a complete cycle of normal gait. Phd Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, TX, USA, 1999.
66.
KammanJWHustonRL. Constrained multibody system dynamics - an automated approach. Comput Struct1984; 18(6): 999–1003.
67.
TerrierAAeberhardMMichellodY. A musculoskeletal shoulder model based on pseudo-inverse and null-space optimization. Med Engng Phys2010; 32(9): 1050–1056.
68.
FreglyBJBesierTFLloydDG. Grand challenge competition to predict in vivo knee loads. J Orthop Res2011; submitted. Data can be accessed at https://simtk.org/home/kneeloads DOI:10.1007/s11044-011-9286-310.1007/s11044-011-9286-3.
69.
De LucaCJ. The use of surface electromyography in biomechanics. J Appl Biomech1997; 13(2): 135–163.
70.
De LucaCJGilmoreLDKuznetsovMRoySH. Filtering the surface EMG signal: movement artifact and baseline noise contamination. J Biomech2010; 43(8): 1573–1579.
71.
BergmannGDeuretzbacherGHellerM. Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech2001; 34(7): 859–871.
72.
PandyMGAndriacchiTP. Muscle and joint function in human locomotion. 12th ed.2010; 12: 401–33.
73.
CollinsJJO’ConnorJJ. Muscle-ligament interactions at the knee during walking. Proc imeche, Part H: J Engng Med1991; 205(1): 11–18.
74.
MoissenetFChezeLDumasR. Anatomical kinematic constraints: consequences on musculo-tendon forces and joint reactions. Multibody Syst Dyn2011; in press.
75.
DumasRChezeL. Hip and knee joints are more stabilized than driven during the stance phase of gait: an analysis of the 3D angle between joint moment and joint angular velocity. Gait Post2008; 28(2): 243–250.
76.
LinYCWalterJPBanksSA. Simultaneous prediction of muscle and contact forces in the knee during gait. J Biomech2010; 43(5): 945–952.
77.
BuchananTSLloydDGManalKBesierTF. Neuromusculoskeletal modeling: estimation of muscle forces and joint moments and movements from measurements of neural command. J Appl Biomech2004; 20(4): 367–395.
78.
WinbyCRLloydDGBesierTFKirkTB. Muscle and external load contribution to knee joint contact loads during normal gait. J Biomech2009; 42(14): 2294–2300.
79.
BogeyRAGitterAJBarnesLA. Determination of ankle muscle power in normal gait using an EMG-to-force processing approach. J Electromyogr Kinesiol2010; 20(1): 46–54.
80.
BuchananTSLloydDGManalKBesierTF. Estimation of muscle forces and joint moments using a forward-inverse dynamics model. Med Sci Sports Exerc2005; 37(11): 1911–1916.
81.
DelpSLLoanJP. A graphics-based software system to develop and analyze models of musculoskeletal structures. Comput Biol Med1995; 25(1): 21–34.
82.
WalkerPSRovickJSRobertsonDD. The effects of knee brace hinge design and placement on joint mechanics. J Biomech1988; 21(11): 965–974.
VictorJLabeyLWongP. The influence of muscle load on tibiofemoral knee kinematics. J Orthop Res2010; 28(4): 419–428.
85.
LuT-WTsaiT-YKuoM-Y. In vivo three-dimensional kinematics of the normal knee during active extension under unloaded and loaded conditions using single-plane fluoroscopy. Med Engng Phys2008; 30(8): 1004–1012.
86.
FranciRParenti-CastelliVBelvedereCLeardiniA. A new one-DOF fully parallel mechanism for modelling passive motion at the human tibiotalar joint. J Biomech2009; 42(10): 1403–1408.
87.
AndersenMSDamsgaardMMacWilliamsBRasmussenJ. A computationally efficient optimisation-based method for parameter identification of kinematically determinate and over-determinate biomechanical systems. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engng2009; 13: 171–183.
88.
DelpSLMaloneyW. Effects of hip center location on the moment-generating capacity of the muscles. J Biomech1993; 26(4-5): 485–499.
89.
RienerREdrichT. Identification of passive elastic joint moments in the lower extremities. J Biomech1999; 32(5): 539–544.
90.
AuduMLDavyDT. The influence of muscle model complexity in musculoskeletal motion modeling. J Biomech Engng1985; 107(2): 147–157.
91.
DavyDTAuduML. A dynamic optimization technique for predicting muscle forces in the swing phase of gait. J Biomech1987; 20(2): 187–201.
92.
HatzeH. The complete optimization of a human motion. Math Biosci1976; 28(1-2): 99–135.
93.
WhittingtonBSilderAHeiderscheitBThelenDG. The contribution of passive-elastic mechanisms to lower extremity joint kinetics during human walking. Gait Post2008; 27(4): 628–634.
94.
WuGSieglerSAllardP. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion–part I: ankle, hip, and spine. J Biomech2002; 35(4): 543–548.
95.
KapandjiIA. Physiology of the joints, volume two: the lower limb. Sixth ed., Churchill Livingstone, 2010.
