Quantifying the Importance of Active Muscle Repositioning a Finite Element Neck Model in Flexion Using Kinematic, Kinetic, and Tissue-Level Responses.

Autor: Hadagali P; Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada., Fischer SL; Kinesiology and Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada., Callaghan JP; Kinesiology and Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada., Cronin DS; Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada. dscronin@uwaterloo.ca.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Annals of biomedical engineering [Ann Biomed Eng] 2024 Mar; Vol. 52 (3), pp. 510-525. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Nov 03.
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-023-03396-7
Abstrakt: Purpose: Non-neutral neck positions are important initial conditions in impact scenarios, associated with a higher incidence of injury. Repositioning in finite element (FE) neck models is often achieved by applying external boundary conditions (BCs) to the head while constraining the first thoracic vertebra (T1). However, in vivo, neck muscles contract to achieve a desired head and neck position generating initial loads and deformations in the tissues. In the present study, a new muscle-based repositioning method was compared to traditional applied BCs using a contemporary FE neck model for forward head flexion of 30°.
Methods: For the BC method, an external moment (2.6 Nm) was applied to the head with T1 fixed, while for the muscle-based method, the flexors and extensors were co-contracted under gravity loading to achieve the target flexion.
Results: The kinematic response from muscle contraction was within 10% of the in vivo experimental data, while the BC method differed by 18%. The intervertebral disc forces from muscle contraction were agreeable with the literature (167 N compression, 12 N shear), while the BC methodology underpredicted the disc forces owing to the lack of spine compression. Correspondingly, the strains in the annulus fibrosus increased by an average of 60% across all levels due to muscle contraction compared to BC method.
Conclusion: The muscle repositioning method enhanced the kinetic response and subsequently led to differences in tissue-level responses compared to the conventional BC method. The improved kinematics and kinetics quantify the importance of repositioning FE neck models using active muscles to achieve non-neutral neck positions.
(© 2023. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Biomedical Engineering Society.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: