4.5 Article

Effect of Subject-Specific Vertebral Position and Head and Neck Size on Calculation of Spine Musculoskeletal Moments

Journal

ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 46, Issue 11, Pages 1844-1856

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-018-2084-9

Keywords

Musculoskeletal modeling; Cervical spine kinematics; Anthropometry; Neck loads

Funding

  1. Office Ergonomics Research Committee
  2. National Science Foundation (CBET) [0748303]
  3. Directorate For Engineering
  4. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [0748303] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Spine musculoskeletal models used to estimate loads and displacements require many simplifying assumptions. We examined how assumptions about subject size and vertebral positions can affect the model outcomes. Head and neck models were developed to represent 30 subjects (15 males and 15 females) in neutral posture and in forward head postures adopted while using tablet computers. We examined the effects of (1) subject size-specific parameters for head mass and muscle strength; and (2) vertebral positions obtained either directly from X-ray or estimated from photographs. The outcome metrics were maximum neck extensor muscle moment, gravitational moment of the head, and gravitational demand, the ratio between gravitational moment and maximum muscle moment. The estimates of maximum muscle moment, gravitational moment and gravitational demand were significantly different when models included subject-specific vertebral positions. Outcome metrics of models that included subject-specific head and neck size were not significantly different from generic models on average, but they had significant sex differences. This work suggests that developing models from X-rays rather than photographs has a large effect on model predictions. Moreover, size-specific model parameters may be important to evaluate sex differences in neck musculoskeletal disorders.

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