header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

DEVELOPMENT OF AN INVERSE DYNAMIC MODEL OF THE ELBOW JOINT



Abstract

Purpose: To develop a computerized inverse dynamic 3D model of the upper limb, focussing on the elbow.

Methods: Anatomic bony landmarks were identified in one cadaveric arm using an electromagnetic tracking device (Flock of Birds, Ascension Technologies, VT). The articular surfaces of the radiohumeral and ulnohumeral joints were digitized, thereby identifying the areas over which the contact forces could act. Attachment sites of the medial collateral (MCL) and lateral collateral (LCL) ligaments and the major muscles (BRA=brachialis, BIC=biceps, BRD=brachioradialis, TRI=triceps) were also digitized to create line-of-action vectors. These data were fed into custom-written software (MATLAB®, The MathWorks Inc., MA) that simulated flexion with gravity as external loading, and calculated the forces exerted by the joint structures. As an indeterminate system, computerized mathematical optimization solved for the internal loads using a cost function that minimized the sum of forces squared.

Results: Model outputs were comparable with results from previous muscle activity and cadaveric studies. Force ratios among the elbow’s prime movers at 30 degrees of flexion agreed quite closely with previous findings (Funk et al, 1987), with percent differences of 11% (BRA), −5% (BIC), −6% (BRD), and −1% (TRI). Overall, the brachialis force was the highest throughout flexion, being the prime mover, while extensor (triceps) activity remained quiet through mid-range. The magnitude of the radiohumeral contact force showed a decreasing pattern through the arc of flexion, similar to the trend found experimentally by others (Morrey et al, 1988). The results also demonstrated stabilizing forces supplied by the MCL, but not the LCL.

Conclusions: Current understanding of upper extremity loading is very limited. Creating an accurate computerized model of the elbow joint, would reduce the need for experimental testing with cadavers, which are always of limited availability. While stability of the elbow has been experimentally investigated, this model will be able to quantify the forces within the stabilizing structures. By establishing a normal baseline of these forces, surgical procedures and joint replacement designs can be validated. Thus, this model can provide a significant contribution to upper extremity biomechanics research and clinical treatments.

Correspondence should be addressed to Cynthia Vezina, Communications Manager, COA, 4150-360 Ste. Catherine St. West, Westmount, QC H3Z 2Y5, Canada