Sensitivity of single-equivalent trunk extensor muscle models to anatomical and functional assumptions

    Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    Abstract

    Single-equivalent muscle models are often used to estimate loads on the lumbosacral joint after net extension moments have been calculated by means of inverse dynamics. These models usually ignore the effects trunk flexion has on the extensor lever arm. In addition, no systematic analysis of the sensitivity to the anatomical and functional assumptions made in these models is available. In the present study a series of single-equivalent models incorporating trunk flexion dependence was derived from a detailed description of the trunk musculature. Each model was based on different anatomical and functional assumptions. The differences of estimates of compression and shear forces on the lumbosacral disc during a lifting movement resulting from these models were analysed. The results show that these load estimates heavily depend on assumptions regarding anthropometry, lumbar curvature and coactivity of abdominal muscles and only moderately on assumptions regarding force sharing between extensor muscles. Fairly simple single-equivalent models with the net moment and thorax orientation as input can be used to predict lumbosacral compression and shear.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)195-198
    Number of pages4
    JournalJournal of Biomechanics
    Volume32
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1999

    Fingerprint

    Anatomic Models
    Muscle
    Abdominal Muscles
    Muscles
    Anthropometry
    Thorax
    Joints

    Cite this

    @article{c5671da0c0e04638805f678fc1f2f0fd,
    title = "Sensitivity of single-equivalent trunk extensor muscle models to anatomical and functional assumptions",
    abstract = "Single-equivalent muscle models are often used to estimate loads on the lumbosacral joint after net extension moments have been calculated by means of inverse dynamics. These models usually ignore the effects trunk flexion has on the extensor lever arm. In addition, no systematic analysis of the sensitivity to the anatomical and functional assumptions made in these models is available. In the present study a series of single-equivalent models incorporating trunk flexion dependence was derived from a detailed description of the trunk musculature. Each model was based on different anatomical and functional assumptions. The differences of estimates of compression and shear forces on the lumbosacral disc during a lifting movement resulting from these models were analysed. The results show that these load estimates heavily depend on assumptions regarding anthropometry, lumbar curvature and coactivity of abdominal muscles and only moderately on assumptions regarding force sharing between extensor muscles. Fairly simple single-equivalent models with the net moment and thorax orientation as input can be used to predict lumbosacral compression and shear.",
    author = "{van Dieen}, J.H. and {de Looze}, M.P.",
    year = "1999",
    doi = "10.1016/S0021-9290(98)00149-3",
    language = "English",
    volume = "32",
    pages = "195--198",
    journal = "Journal of Biomechanics",
    issn = "0021-9290",
    publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

    }

    Sensitivity of single-equivalent trunk extensor muscle models to anatomical and functional assumptions. / van Dieen, J.H.; de Looze, M.P.

    In: Journal of Biomechanics, Vol. 32, 1999, p. 195-198.

    Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Sensitivity of single-equivalent trunk extensor muscle models to anatomical and functional assumptions

    AU - van Dieen, J.H.

    AU - de Looze, M.P.

    PY - 1999

    Y1 - 1999

    N2 - Single-equivalent muscle models are often used to estimate loads on the lumbosacral joint after net extension moments have been calculated by means of inverse dynamics. These models usually ignore the effects trunk flexion has on the extensor lever arm. In addition, no systematic analysis of the sensitivity to the anatomical and functional assumptions made in these models is available. In the present study a series of single-equivalent models incorporating trunk flexion dependence was derived from a detailed description of the trunk musculature. Each model was based on different anatomical and functional assumptions. The differences of estimates of compression and shear forces on the lumbosacral disc during a lifting movement resulting from these models were analysed. The results show that these load estimates heavily depend on assumptions regarding anthropometry, lumbar curvature and coactivity of abdominal muscles and only moderately on assumptions regarding force sharing between extensor muscles. Fairly simple single-equivalent models with the net moment and thorax orientation as input can be used to predict lumbosacral compression and shear.

    AB - Single-equivalent muscle models are often used to estimate loads on the lumbosacral joint after net extension moments have been calculated by means of inverse dynamics. These models usually ignore the effects trunk flexion has on the extensor lever arm. In addition, no systematic analysis of the sensitivity to the anatomical and functional assumptions made in these models is available. In the present study a series of single-equivalent models incorporating trunk flexion dependence was derived from a detailed description of the trunk musculature. Each model was based on different anatomical and functional assumptions. The differences of estimates of compression and shear forces on the lumbosacral disc during a lifting movement resulting from these models were analysed. The results show that these load estimates heavily depend on assumptions regarding anthropometry, lumbar curvature and coactivity of abdominal muscles and only moderately on assumptions regarding force sharing between extensor muscles. Fairly simple single-equivalent models with the net moment and thorax orientation as input can be used to predict lumbosacral compression and shear.

    U2 - 10.1016/S0021-9290(98)00149-3

    DO - 10.1016/S0021-9290(98)00149-3

    M3 - Article

    VL - 32

    SP - 195

    EP - 198

    JO - Journal of Biomechanics

    JF - Journal of Biomechanics

    SN - 0021-9290

    ER -