-
Something wrong with this record ?
Role of optimization criterion in static asymmetric analysis of lumbar spine load
M. Daniel,
Language English Country Austria
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Models, Anatomic MeSH
- Lumbar Vertebrae physiopathology MeSH
- Biomechanical Phenomena MeSH
- Electromyography MeSH
- Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted MeSH
- Isometric Contraction physiology MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Intervertebral Disc physiopathology MeSH
- Tomography, X-Ray Computed MeSH
- Posture physiology MeSH
- Postural Balance MeSH
- Models, Theoretical MeSH
- Weight-Bearing physiology MeSH
- Imaging, Three-Dimensional MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
A common method for load estimation in biomechanics is the inverse dynamics optimization, where the muscle activation pattern is found by minimizing or maximizing the optimization criterion. It has been shown that various optimization criteria predict remarkably similar muscle activation pattern and intra-articular contact forces during leg motion. The aim of this paper is to study the effect of the choice of optimization criterion on L4/L5 loading during static asymmetric loading. Upright standing with weight in one stretched arm was taken as a representative position. Musculoskeletal model of lumbar spine model was created from CT images of Visible Human Project. Several criteria were tested based on the minimization of muscle forces, muscle stresses, and spinal load. All criteria provide the same level of lumbar spine loading (difference is below 25%), except the criterion of minimum lumbar shear force which predicts unrealistically high spinal load and should not be considered further. Estimated spinal load and predicted muscle force activation pattern are in accordance with the intradiscal pressure measurements and EMG measurements. The L4/L5 spine loads 1312 N, 1674 N, and 1993 N were predicted for mass of weight in hand 2, 5, and 8 kg, respectively using criterion of mininum muscle stress cubed. As the optimization criteria do not considerably affect the spinal load, their choice is not critical in further clinical or ergonomic studies and computationally simpler criterion can be used.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc12024405
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20121024124733.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 120815e20110729au f 000 0#eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1007/s10354-011-0904-8 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)21792528
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a au
- 100 1_
- $a Daniel, Matej $u Laboratory of Biomechanics, Department of Mechanics, Biomechanics and Mechatronics, Czech Technical University in Prague, Technická. Matej.Daniel@fs.cvut.cz
- 245 10
- $a Role of optimization criterion in static asymmetric analysis of lumbar spine load / $c M. Daniel,
- 520 9_
- $a A common method for load estimation in biomechanics is the inverse dynamics optimization, where the muscle activation pattern is found by minimizing or maximizing the optimization criterion. It has been shown that various optimization criteria predict remarkably similar muscle activation pattern and intra-articular contact forces during leg motion. The aim of this paper is to study the effect of the choice of optimization criterion on L4/L5 loading during static asymmetric loading. Upright standing with weight in one stretched arm was taken as a representative position. Musculoskeletal model of lumbar spine model was created from CT images of Visible Human Project. Several criteria were tested based on the minimization of muscle forces, muscle stresses, and spinal load. All criteria provide the same level of lumbar spine loading (difference is below 25%), except the criterion of minimum lumbar shear force which predicts unrealistically high spinal load and should not be considered further. Estimated spinal load and predicted muscle force activation pattern are in accordance with the intradiscal pressure measurements and EMG measurements. The L4/L5 spine loads 1312 N, 1674 N, and 1993 N were predicted for mass of weight in hand 2, 5, and 8 kg, respectively using criterion of mininum muscle stress cubed. As the optimization criteria do not considerably affect the spinal load, their choice is not critical in further clinical or ergonomic studies and computationally simpler criterion can be used.
- 650 _2
- $a biomechanika $7 D001696
- 650 _2
- $a elektromyografie $7 D004576
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a interpretace obrazu počítačem $7 D007090
- 650 _2
- $a zobrazování trojrozměrné $7 D021621
- 650 _2
- $a meziobratlová ploténka $x patofyziologie $7 D007403
- 650 _2
- $a isometrická kontrakce $x fyziologie $7 D007537
- 650 _2
- $a bederní obratle $x patofyziologie $7 D008159
- 650 _2
- $a anatomické modely $7 D008953
- 650 _2
- $a teoretické modely $7 D008962
- 650 _2
- $a posturální rovnováha $7 D004856
- 650 _2
- $a postura těla $x fyziologie $7 D011187
- 650 _2
- $a počítačová rentgenová tomografie $7 D014057
- 650 _2
- $a zatížení muskuloskeletálního systému $x fyziologie $7 D016474
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 773 0_
- $w MED00010763 $t Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) $x 1563-258X $g Roč. 161, č. 19-20 (20110729), s. 477-85
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21792528 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y m
- 990 __
- $a 20120815 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20121024124937 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 946553 $s 781733
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2011 $b 161 $c 19-20 $d 477-85 $e 20110729 $i 1563-258X $m Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) $n Wien Med Wochenschr $x MED00010763
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20120815/12/02