Biomechanical Measurements of Surgical Drilling Force and Torque in Human Versus Artificial Femurs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few experimental studies have examined surgical drilling in human bone, and no studies have inquired into this aspect for a popular commercially-available artificial bone used in biomechanical studies. Sixteen fresh-frozen human femurs and five artificial femurs were obtained. Cortical specimens were mounted into a clamping system equipped with a thrust force and torque transducer. Using a CNC machine, unicortical holes were drilled in each specimen at 1000 rpm, 1250 rpm, and 1500 rpm with a 3.2 mm diameter surgical drill bit. Feed rate was 120 mm/min. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Force at increasing spindle speed (1000 rpm, 1250 rpm, and 1500 rpm), respectively, showed a range for human femurs (198.4 ± 14.2 N, 180.6 ± 14.0 N, and 176.3 ± 11.2 N) and artificial femurs (87.2 ± 19.3 N, 82.2 ± 11.2 N, and 75.7 ± 8.8 N). For human femurs, force at 1000 rpm was greater than at other speeds (p ≤ 0.018). For artificial femurs, there was no speed effect on force (p ≥ 0.991). Torque at increasing spindle speed (1000 rpm, 1250 rpm, and 1500 rpm), respectively, showed a range for human femurs (186.3 ± 16.9 N·mm, 157.8 ± 16.1 N·mm, and 140.2 ± 16.4 N·mm) and artificial femurs (67.2 ± 8.4 N·mm, 61.0 ± 2.9 N·mm, and 53.3 ± 2.9 N·mm). For human femurs, torque at 1000 rpm was greater than at other speeds (p < 0.001). For artificial femurs, there was no difference in torque for 1000 rpm versus higher speeds (p ≥ 0.228), and there was only a borderline difference between the higher speeds (p = 0.046). Concerning human versus artificial femurs, their behavior was different at every speed (force, p ≤ 0.001; torque, p < 0.001). For human specimens at 1500 rpm, force and torque were linearly correlated with standardized bone mineral density (sBMD) and the T-score used to clinically categorize bone quality (R ≥ 0.56), but there was poor correlation with age at all speeds (R ≤ 0.37). These artificial bones fail to replicate force and torque in human cortical bone during surgical drilling. To date, this is the largest series of human long bones biomechanically tested for surgical drilling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".