MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400478301 · doi:10.1101/2024.07.04.601890

Knee Biomechanics during Walking in Individuals with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair: The Role of a Custom 3D Printed Knee Brace

2024· preprint· en· W4400478301 on OpenAlexaff
Florian Mougin, Mickaël Begon, Gauthier Desmyttere, Jacinte Bleau, Marie‐Lyne Nault, Yosra Cherni

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMedicago (Canada)Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBraceBiomechanicsAnterior cruciate ligament3d printedOrthodonticsKnee flexionMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationCruciate ligamentAnatomyEngineeringStructural engineeringBiomedical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries frequently lead to altered gait biomechanics and muscle activation patterns, increasing the risk of osteoarthritis. Knee braces are commonly used to address these issues although a lack of consensus remains regarding their clinical benefits. The recent emergence of 3D-printed braces, lighter and personalized, could improve rehabilitation. Objectives To evaluate the effect of a novel custom-made 3D-printed knee brace (Provoke™) in individuals after unilateral ACL reconstruction during walking. The brace incorporates an asymmetrical hinge system aimed at stabilizing the knee joint while minimizing compensatory movements. Methods Fourteen participants with unilateral ACL reconstruction wore the Provoke™ brace while walking at comfortable and fast paces. Knee kinematics and kinetics, and muscular activity (rectus femoris, vastus medialis, and semitendinosus) were assessed with and without the brace. Two-tailed non-parametric paired T-tests were used to assess the biomechanical effect of the brace. Results and conclusions The Provoke™ brace improved knee kinematics, facilitating a more neutral knee position by reducing valgus angles (-1.95°), and increasing flexion angles (+1.14°). Additionally, it enhanced muscle activation, particularly of the rectus femoris, suggesting improved quadriceps function. Overall, the Provoke™ brace effectively improves knee function and reduces muscle imbalances in individuals undergoing ACL reconstruction. It may help prevent further injury and reduce the risk of post-traumatic osteoarthritis development. The long-term effects of brace use in ACL rehabilitation must be investigated. Key Points Walking while wearing Provoke™ brace allow to reduce knee valgus angles which could counteract the development of post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Braced walking may mitigate the stiffened knee gait strategy by increasing the peak knee flexion angle during the stance phase of the gait. Increased rectus femoris activation during early stance phase could improve knee function and stability, acting against quadriceps weakness often observed after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques→French-language works237,207→