BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF KNEE BRACING IN SUBJECTS WITH KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Valgus unloader knee braces are a conservative treatment option for medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA). These braces are designed to reduce painful, and potentially injurious compressive loading on the damaged medial side of the joint through application of a frontal-plane abduction moment. While some patients experience improvements in pain, function, and joint loading, others see little to no benefit from bracing [1]. Previous biomechanical studies investigating the mechanical effectiveness of bracing have been limited in either their musculoskeletal detail [2] or incorporation of altered external joint moments and forces [3]. The first objective was to model the relative contributions of gait dynamics, muscle forces, and the external brace abduction moment to reducing medial compartment knee loads. The second objective was to determine what factors predict the effectiveness of the valgus unloading brace. Seventeen people with knee OA (8 Female age 54.4 +/− 4.2, BMI 30.00 +/− 4.0 kg/m 2 , Kellgren-Lawrence range of 1–4 with med. = 3) and 20 healthy age-matched controls participated in this study which was approved by the institutional ethics review board. Subjects walked across a 20m walkway with and without a Donjoy OA Assist knee brace while marker trajectories, ground reaction forces, and lower limb electromyography were recorded. The external moment applied by the brace was estimated by multiplying the brace deformation by is pre-determined brace-stiffness. For each subject, a representative stride was selected for each brace condition. A generic musculokeletal model with two legs, a torso, and 96 muscles was modified to include subject-specific frontal plane alignment and medial and lateral contact locations [4]. Muscle forces, and tibiofemoral contact forces were estimated using static optimization [4]. We defined brace effectiveness as the difference in the peak medial contact force between the braced and the unbraced conditions. A stepwise regression analysis was performed to predict brace effectiveness based on: X-ray frontal plane alignment, medial joint space, KL grade, mass, WOMAC scores, unbraced walking speed, trunk, hip and knee joint angles and moments. The OA Assist brace reduced medial joint loading by approximately 0.1 to 0.2 BW or roughly 10%, during stance. This decrease was primarily due to the external brace abduction moment, and not changes in gait dynamics, or muscle forces. The brace effectiveness could be predicted (R 2 =0.77) by the KL grade, and the magnitude of the hip adduction moment in early stance (unbraced). The brace was more effective for those that had larger hip adduction moments and for those with more severe OA. The valgus knee brace was found to reduce the medial joint contact force by approximately 10% as estimated using a musculoskeletal model. Bracing resulted in a greater reduction in joint contact force for those who had more severe OA while still maintaining a hip adduction moment similar to that of healthy controls.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".