下落着陆的生物力学:成骨刺激措施可能会有所不同。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Andrew R Wilzman, Devin T Wong, Karen L Troy
{"title":"下落着陆的生物力学:成骨刺激措施可能会有所不同。","authors":"Andrew R Wilzman, Devin T Wong, Karen L Troy","doi":"10.22540/JMNI-25-001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Impact exercises are known to increase bone mineral density (BMD) through the biological process of bone remodeling, increasing strength and resistance to fracture. The purpose of this study was to compare several measures that have been used as surrogates for bone impact as a magnitude of its potential to induce bone remodeling.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty healthy adults (10 male, 10 female) participated in a biomechanical investigation of how drop height and landing style (bilateral vs. unilateral) affect various estimates of bone remodeling stimuli. These stimuli surrogates include accelerations measured by Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs), ground reaction forces, joint contact forces estimated by musculoskeletal modeling, and tibia strains estimated by finite element modeling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Drop height was directly related to stimulus magnitudes, but there was little benefit to drop heights greater than 0.4 m. In contrast, switching from a bilateral to a unilateral landing had a large positive effect. A post-hoc analysis revealed that a linear regression of kinematics and reaction force explained up to 79% of the variance in computationally expensive bone remodeling stimulus measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>subject-specific bone strain analysis may not be necessary to understand the magnitude of a bone remodeling stimulus of an exercise.</p>","PeriodicalId":16430,"journal":{"name":"Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions","volume":"25 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11880855/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biomechanics of a Drop Landing: Osteogenic Stimulus Measures May Vary.\",\"authors\":\"Andrew R Wilzman, Devin T Wong, Karen L Troy\",\"doi\":\"10.22540/JMNI-25-001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Impact exercises are known to increase bone mineral density (BMD) through the biological process of bone remodeling, increasing strength and resistance to fracture. The purpose of this study was to compare several measures that have been used as surrogates for bone impact as a magnitude of its potential to induce bone remodeling.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty healthy adults (10 male, 10 female) participated in a biomechanical investigation of how drop height and landing style (bilateral vs. unilateral) affect various estimates of bone remodeling stimuli. These stimuli surrogates include accelerations measured by Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs), ground reaction forces, joint contact forces estimated by musculoskeletal modeling, and tibia strains estimated by finite element modeling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Drop height was directly related to stimulus magnitudes, but there was little benefit to drop heights greater than 0.4 m. In contrast, switching from a bilateral to a unilateral landing had a large positive effect. A post-hoc analysis revealed that a linear regression of kinematics and reaction force explained up to 79% of the variance in computationally expensive bone remodeling stimulus measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>subject-specific bone strain analysis may not be necessary to understand the magnitude of a bone remodeling stimulus of an exercise.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"1-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11880855/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22540/JMNI-25-001\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22540/JMNI-25-001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:冲击性运动通过骨重塑的生物过程增加骨矿物质密度(BMD),增加强度和抗骨折能力。本研究的目的是比较几种已被用作替代骨冲击的措施,作为其诱导骨重塑的潜力的大小。方法:20名健康成人(男性10名,女性10名)参与了一项生物力学研究,研究落点高度和着陆方式(双侧和单侧)如何影响各种骨重塑刺激的估计。这些刺激替代物包括惯性测量单元(imu)测量的加速度、地面反作用力、肌肉骨骼模型估计的关节接触力以及有限元模型估计的胫骨应变。结果:落差高度与刺激强度有直接关系,但落差高度大于0.4 m时效果不明显。相比之下,从双边着陆转向单边着陆则产生了巨大的积极影响。事后分析显示,运动学和反作用力的线性回归解释了高达79%的计算昂贵的骨重塑刺激措施的方差。结论:特定受试者的骨应变分析可能不需要了解运动对骨重塑刺激的程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Biomechanics of a Drop Landing: Osteogenic Stimulus Measures May Vary.

Biomechanics of a Drop Landing: Osteogenic Stimulus Measures May Vary.

Biomechanics of a Drop Landing: Osteogenic Stimulus Measures May Vary.

Biomechanics of a Drop Landing: Osteogenic Stimulus Measures May Vary.

Objectives: Impact exercises are known to increase bone mineral density (BMD) through the biological process of bone remodeling, increasing strength and resistance to fracture. The purpose of this study was to compare several measures that have been used as surrogates for bone impact as a magnitude of its potential to induce bone remodeling.

Methods: Twenty healthy adults (10 male, 10 female) participated in a biomechanical investigation of how drop height and landing style (bilateral vs. unilateral) affect various estimates of bone remodeling stimuli. These stimuli surrogates include accelerations measured by Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs), ground reaction forces, joint contact forces estimated by musculoskeletal modeling, and tibia strains estimated by finite element modeling.

Results: Drop height was directly related to stimulus magnitudes, but there was little benefit to drop heights greater than 0.4 m. In contrast, switching from a bilateral to a unilateral landing had a large positive effect. A post-hoc analysis revealed that a linear regression of kinematics and reaction force explained up to 79% of the variance in computationally expensive bone remodeling stimulus measures.

Conclusions: subject-specific bone strain analysis may not be necessary to understand the magnitude of a bone remodeling stimulus of an exercise.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Musculoskeletal and Neuronal Interactions (JMNI) is an academic journal dealing with the pathophysiology and treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. It is published quarterly (months of issue March, June, September, December). Its purpose is to publish original, peer-reviewed papers of research and clinical experience in all areas of the musculoskeletal system and its interactions with the nervous system, especially metabolic bone diseases, with particular emphasis on osteoporosis. Additionally, JMNI publishes the Abstracts from the biannual meetings of the International Society of Musculoskeletal and Neuronal Interactions, and hosts Abstracts of other meetings on topics related to the aims and scope of JMNI.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信