Inverse kinematics in cervical spine models: Effects of scaling and model degrees of freedom for extension and flexion movements

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS
{"title":"Inverse kinematics in cervical spine models: Effects of scaling and model degrees of freedom for extension and flexion movements","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Intervertebral kinematics can affect model-predicted loads and strains in the spine; therefore knowledge of expected vertebral kinematics error is important for understanding the limitations of model predictions. This study addressed how different kinematic models of the neck affect the prediction of intervertebral kinematics from markers on the head and trunk. Eight subjects executed head and neck extension-flexion motion with simultaneous motion capture and biplanar dynamic stereo-radiography (DSX) of vertebrae C1-C7. A generic head and neck model in OpenSim was scaled by marker data, and three versions of the model were used with an inverse kinematics solver. The models differed according to the number of independent degrees of freedom (DOF) between the head and trunk: 3 rotational DOF with constraints defining intervertebral kinematics as a function of overall head-trunk motion; 24DOF with 3 independent rotational DOF at each level, skull-T1; 48DOF with 3 rotational and 3 translational DOF at each level. Marker tracking error was lower for scaled models compared to generic models and decreased as model DOF increased. The largest mean absolute error (MAE) was found in extension-flexion angle and anterior-posterior translation at C1-C2, and superior-inferior translation at C2-C3. Model scaling and complexity did not have a statistically significant effect on most error metrics when corrected for multiple comparisons, but ranges of motion were significantly different from DSX in some cases. This study evaluated model kinematics in comparison to gold standard radiographic data and provides important information about intervertebral kinematics error that are foundational to model validity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929024003804","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intervertebral kinematics can affect model-predicted loads and strains in the spine; therefore knowledge of expected vertebral kinematics error is important for understanding the limitations of model predictions. This study addressed how different kinematic models of the neck affect the prediction of intervertebral kinematics from markers on the head and trunk. Eight subjects executed head and neck extension-flexion motion with simultaneous motion capture and biplanar dynamic stereo-radiography (DSX) of vertebrae C1-C7. A generic head and neck model in OpenSim was scaled by marker data, and three versions of the model were used with an inverse kinematics solver. The models differed according to the number of independent degrees of freedom (DOF) between the head and trunk: 3 rotational DOF with constraints defining intervertebral kinematics as a function of overall head-trunk motion; 24DOF with 3 independent rotational DOF at each level, skull-T1; 48DOF with 3 rotational and 3 translational DOF at each level. Marker tracking error was lower for scaled models compared to generic models and decreased as model DOF increased. The largest mean absolute error (MAE) was found in extension-flexion angle and anterior-posterior translation at C1-C2, and superior-inferior translation at C2-C3. Model scaling and complexity did not have a statistically significant effect on most error metrics when corrected for multiple comparisons, but ranges of motion were significantly different from DSX in some cases. This study evaluated model kinematics in comparison to gold standard radiographic data and provides important information about intervertebral kinematics error that are foundational to model validity.

颈椎模型的逆运动学:伸屈运动的比例和模型自由度的影响。
椎间运动学会影响模型预测的脊柱负荷和应变;因此,了解预期的椎间运动学误差对于理解模型预测的局限性非常重要。本研究探讨了不同的颈部运动学模型如何影响根据头部和躯干上的标记预测椎间运动学。八名受试者通过对 C1-C7 椎体进行同步运动捕捉和双平面动态立体放射成像(DSX)来执行头颈部的伸屈运动。OpenSim 中的通用头颈模型根据标记数据进行缩放,该模型的三个版本与逆运动学求解器一起使用。这些模型根据头部和躯干之间的独立自由度(DOF)数量而有所不同:3个旋转自由度(DOF),其约束条件将椎间运动学定义为头-躯干整体运动的函数;24DOF,每个水平(头骨-T1)有3个独立旋转自由度;48DOF,每个水平有3个旋转自由度和3个平移自由度。与一般模型相比,缩放模型的标记跟踪误差较小,并且随着模型 DOF 的增加而减小。最大的平均绝对误差(MAE)出现在 C1-C2 的伸屈角度和前后平移,以及 C2-C3 的上下平移。经多重比较校正后,模型缩放和复杂程度对大多数误差指标没有统计学意义上的显著影响,但在某些情况下,运动范围与 DSX 存在显著差异。该研究评估了模型运动学与金标准放射学数据的比较,并提供了有关椎间运动学误差的重要信息,这些信息是模型有效性的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of biomechanics
Journal of biomechanics 生物-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership. Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to: -Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells. -Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions. -Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response. -Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing. -Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine. -Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction. -Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules. -Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints. -Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics. -Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信