MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389667977 · doi:10.1115/1.4064249

Electronics-Free Soft Robotic Knee Brace for Dynamic Unloading During Gait for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Proof-of-Concept Study

2023· article· en· W4389667977 on OpenAlexafffund
Amanda J. Johnson, Run Ze Gao, Kendal A. Marriott, Clark R. Dickerson, Monica R. Maly, Carolyn L. Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Devices · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFluidicsBraceKnee JointCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)GaitBiomedical engineeringComputer scienceSimulationMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineSurgeryElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a novel electronics-free soft robotic knee brace which employs a closed-loop fluidic regenerative (CLFR) system for dynamic unloading in unicompartmental tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (OA). The existing dynamic unloaders are bulky, large, and heavy, and have low compliance likely due to the use of an electrical control box, which is eliminated in the CLFR system. The system consists of a commercial unloading knee brace, a spring-loaded bellow inserted under the heel inside a shoe, a soft-fluidic actuator (bladder), and tubing for fluid transfer. The novelty lies in the fact that the user's body weight (self-powered) compresses the bellow to provide energy to inflate the air bladder placed at the knee. As a result, the yielded pressure unloads the undesirable forces due to knee OA during the stance phase of gait while strategically applying no forces during the swing phase. The knee bladder contact pressure/force, the system response time, and the durability were evaluated via contact pressure measurements for six systems with varying bellow volumes and either pneumatic or hydraulic configurations. All systems produced safe pressure outputs for human skin within a tested bodyweight range of 60–90 kg. Pneumatic and hydraulic systems achieved 250 ms and 400 ms pressurization response times, respectively. During cyclic loading, pneumatic and hydraulic systems demonstrated less than 1% and ∼10% pressure loss, respectively. Overall, the CLFR system created a promising electronics-free solution for dynamically unloading the knee during gait, indicating a potential new paradigm for knee braces.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical DevicesSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207