The screw-home mechanism (SHM) plays an important role in the stability of the knee. Accordingly, the analysis of tibial rotation patterns can be used to elucidate the effect of SHM-related factors.
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of this study was to compare the magnitude of the angle and the pattern of SHM between passive and active movements.
METHODS:
We studied twenty healthy males, of which the angle of knee flexion-extension and tibial longitudinal rotation (TLR) during active and passive movements were measured using the inertial measurement unit. Student’s -tests were used to compare the magnitude of TLR. The waveform similarity was quantified using a coefficient of multiple correlation (CMC).
RESULTS:
Significant differences were found in the TLR between the active and passive movements ( 0.05). The knee flexion-extension waveform similarity was excellent (CMC 0.956). However, the waveform similarity of TLR was weak (CMC 0.629).
CONCLUSION:
The SHM increased abruptly during the last 20 of the active (extension) movement compared with passive extension. The SHM occurred mainly owing to the geometry and shape of the articular surfaces of the knee joint. In addition, muscle contraction was considered to be an important factor in the articulation movement.
MadetiBKChalamalasettiSR. Biomechanics of knee joint – a review. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering. 2015; 10(2): 176–186. doi: 10.1007/s11465-014-0306-x.
2.
WooSL-YAbramowitchSDKilgerRLiangR. Biomechanics of knee ligaments: injury, healing, and repair. Journal of Biomechanics. 2006; 39(1): 1–20. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.10.025.
3.
BlankevoortLHuiskesRde LangeA. The envelope of passive knee joint motion. Journal of Biomechanics. 1988; 21(9): 705–720. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(88)90280-1.
4.
HallenLGLindahlO. The “screw-home” movement in the knee-joint. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica. 1966; 37(1): 97–106. doi: 10.3109/17453676608989407.
5.
KimHYKimKJYangDSJeungSWChoiHGChoyWS. Screw-home movement of the tibiofemoral joint during normal gait: three-dimensional analysis. Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery. 2015; 7(3): 303–309. doi: 10.4055/cios.2015.7.3.303.
6.
MogloKEShirazi-AdlA. Cruciate coupling and screw-home mechanism in passive knee joint during extension-flexion. Journal of Biomechanics. 2005; 38(5): 1075–1083. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.033.
7.
PiazzaSJCavanaghPR. Measurement of the screw-home motion of the knee is sensitive to errors in axis alignment. Journal of Biomechanics. 2000; 33(8): 1029–1034. doi: 10.1016/s0021-9290(00)00056-7.
8.
ZhangLKWangXMNiuYZLiuHXWangF. Relationship between patellar tracking and the “screw-home” mechanism of tibiofemoral joint. Orthopaedic Surgery. 2016; 8(4): 490–495. doi: 10.1111/os.12295.
9.
WilsonDRFeikesJDZavatskyABO’ConnorJJ. The components of passive knee movement are coupled to flexion angle. Journal of Biomechanics. 2000; 33(4): 465–473. doi: 10.1016/s0021-9290(99)00206-7.
10.
KaiserJBradfordRJohnsonKWiebenOThelenDG. Measurement of tibiofemoral kinematics using highly accelerated 3D radial sampling. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2013; 69(5): 1310–1316. doi: 10.1002/mrm.24362.
11.
VictorJLabeyLWongPInnocentiBBellemansJ. The influence of muscle load on tibiofemoral knee kinematics. Journal of Orthopaedic Research. 2010; 28(4): 419–428. doi: 10.1002/jor.21019.
12.
JohalPWilliamsAWraggPHuntDGedroycW. Tibio-femoral movement in the living knee. A study of weight bearing and non-weight bearing knee kinematics using ‘interventional’ MRI. Journal of Biomechanics. 2005; 38(2): 269–276. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.008.
13.
LuTWTsaiTYKuoMYHsuHCChenHL. In vivo three-dimensional kinematics of the normal knee during active extension under unloaded and loaded conditions using single-plane fluoroscopy. Medical Engineering & Physics. 2008; 30(8): 1004–1012. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2008.03.001.
14.
HackerSPIgnatiusADurselenL. The influence of the test setup on knee joint kinematics – a meta-analysis of tibial rotation. Journal of Biomechanics. 2016; 49(13): 2982–2988. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.07.025.
15.
SamukawaMYamamotoTMiyamotoSYamaguchiAKatayoseM. Analysis of tibial rotation using magnetic resonance imaging. Manual Therapy. 2009; 14(6): 712–715. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2009.01.003.
16.
HellerMOKonigCGraichenHHinterwimmerSEhrigRMDudaGN, et al. A new model to predict in vivo human knee kinematics under physiological-like muscle activation. Journal of Biomechanics. 2007; 40(Suppl 1): S45–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.03.005.
17.
BrennanADeluzioKLiQ. Assessment of anatomical frame variation effect on joint angles: a linear perturbation approach. Journal of Biomechanics. 2011; 44(16): 2838–2842. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.09.006.
18.
ZhangJ-TNovakACBrouwerBLiQ. Concurrent validation of Xsens MVN measurement of lower limb joint angular kinematics. Physiological Measurement. 2013; 34(8): N63. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/34/8/N63.
19.
Al-AmriMNicholasKButtonKSparkesVSheeranLDaviesJL. Inertial measurement units for clinical movement analysis: reliability and concurrent validity. Sensors (Basel). 2018; 18(3). doi: 10.3390/s18030719.
20.
Robert-LachaineXMecheriHLarueCPlamondonA. Validation of inertial measurement units with an optoelectronic system for whole-body motion analysis. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing. 2017; 55(4): 609–619. doi: 10.1007/s11517-016-1537-2.
21.
JeonJWLeeDYYuJHKimJSHongJ. Detection and quantification of screw-home movement using nine-axis inertial sensors. The Journal of Korean Physical Therapy. 2019; 31(6): 333–338. doi: 10.18857/jkpt.2019.31.6.333.
TakedaRTadanoSNatorigawaATodohMYoshinariS. Gait posture estimation using wearable acceleration and gyro sensors. Journal of Biomechanics. 2009; 42(15): 2486–2494. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.07.016.
24.
FerrariACuttiAGCappelloA. A new formulation of the coefficient of multiple correlation to assess the similarity of waveforms measured synchronously by different motion analysis protocols. Gait Posture. 2010; 31(4): 540–542. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.02.009.
25.
BriganteCMAbbateNBasileAFaulisiACSessaS. Towards miniaturization of a MEMS-based wearable motion capture system. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics. 2011; 58(8): 3234–3241. doi: 10.1109/TIE.2011.2148671.
26.
SmithPNRefshaugeKMScarvellJM. Development of the concepts of knee kinematics. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2003; 84(12): 1895–1902. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00281-8.
27.
MostEZayontzSLiGOtterbergESabbagKRubashHE. Femoral rollback after cruciate-retaining and stabilizing total knee arthroplasty. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2003; (410): 101–113. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000062380.79828.2e.
28.
IwakiHPinskerovaVFreemanMA. Tibiofemoral movement 1: the shapes and relative movements of the femur and tibia in the unloaded cadaver knee. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British Volume. 2000; 82(8): 1189–1195. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.82B8.0821189.
29.
FerrariDAWilsonDRHayesWC. The effect of release of the popliteus and quadriceps force on rotation of the knee. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2003; (412): 225–233. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000071752.41516.6e.
30.
YagiMWongEKKanamoriADebskiREFuFHWooSL. Biomechanical analysis of an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2002; 30(5): 660–666. doi: 10.1177/03635465020300050501.
31.
WooSLFoxRJSakaneMLivesayGARudyTWFuFH. Biomechanics of the ACL: measurements of in situ force in the ACL and knee kinematics. The Knee. 1998; 5(4): 267–288. doi: 10.1016/S0968-0160(98)00014-3.
32.
MatsumotoHSeedhomBBSudaYOtaniTFujikawaK. Axis location of tibial rotation and its change with flexion angle. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2000; (371): 178–182. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200002000-00022.
33.
GoodfellowJO’ConnorJ. The mechanics of the knee and prosthesis design. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British Volume. 1978; 60(3): 358–369. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.60B3.581081.
