4.5 Article

Probabilistic Evaluation of Predicted Force Sensitivity to Muscle Attachment and Glenohumeral Stability Uncertainty

Journal

ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 42, Issue 9, Pages 1867-1879

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-014-1035-3

Keywords

Stochastic modeling; Shoulder; Rotator cuff; Moment arm; Model parameters

Funding

  1. Canadian Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A major benefit of computational modeling in biomechanics research is its ability to estimate internal muscular demands given limited input information. However, several assumptions regarding model parameters and constraints may influence model outputs. This research evaluated the influence of model parameter variability, specifically muscle attachment locations and glenohumeral stability thresholds, on predicted rotator cuff muscle force during internal and external axial humeral rotation tasks. Additionally, relative sensitivity factors assessed which parameters were more contributory to output variability. Modest model parameter variation resulted in considerable variability in predicted force, with origin-insertion locations being particularly influential. Specifically, the scapula attachment site of the subscapularis muscle was important for modulating predicted force, with sensitivity factors ranging from alpha = 0.2 to 0.7 in a neutral position. The largest variability in predicted forces was present for the subscapularis muscle, with average differences of 33.0 +/- A 9.6% of normalized muscle force (1-99% CI), and a maximal difference of 51% in neutral exertions. Infraspinatus and supraspinatus muscles elicited maximal differences of 15.0 and 20.6%, respectively, between confidence limits. Overall, origin and insertion locations were most influential and thus incorporating geometric variation in the prediction of rotator cuff muscle forces may provide more representative population estimates.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available