A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Development and validation of a kinematically-driven discrete element model of the patellofemoral joint. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Quantifying the complex loads at the patellofemoral joint (PFJ) is vital to understanding the development of PFJ pain and osteoarthritis. Discrete element analysis (DEA) is a computationally efficient method to estimate cartilage contact stresses with potential application at the PFJ to better understand PFJ mechanics. The current study validated a DEA modeling framework driven by PFJ kinematics to predict experimentally-measured PFJ contact stress distributions. Two cadaveric knee specimens underwent quadriceps muscle [215 N] and joint compression [350 N] forces at ten discrete knee positions representing PFJ positions during early gait while measured PFJ kinematics were used to drive specimen-specific DEA models. DEA-computed contact stress and area were compared to experimentally-measured data. There was good agreement between computed and measured mean and peak stress across the specimens and positions (r = 0.63-0.85). DEA-computed mean stress was within an average of 12% (range: 1-47%) of the experimentally-measured mean stress while DEA-computed peak stress was within an average of 22% (range: 1-40%). Stress magnitudes were within the ranges measured (0.17-1.26 MPa computationally vs 0.12-1.13 MPa experimentally). DEA-computed areas overestimated measured areas (average error = 60%; range: 4-117%) with magnitudes ranging from 139 to 307 mm computationally vs 74-194 mm experimentally. DEA estimates of the ratio of lateral to medial patellofemoral stress distribution predicted the experimental data well (mean error = 15%) with minimal measurement bias. These results indicate that kinematically-driven DEA models can provide good estimates of relative changes in PFJ contact stress.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7307598PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.03.032DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

contact stress
12
pfj
9
stress
9
discrete element
8
patellofemoral joint
8
pfj kinematics
8
pfj contact
8
dea models
8
peak stress
8
stress average
8

Similar Publications