Search

Abstract Background Kneeling is necessary for certain religious and ceremonial occasions, crouching work, and gardening, which many people take part in worldwide. However, there have been few reports about kneeling activities. The purpose of this study was to clarify the kinematics of kneeling. Methods The subjects were 15 healthy young males. Kneeling activity was analysed within a knee flexion angle from 100° to maximum flexion (maxflex, mean ± SD = 161.3 ± 3.2°). The kinematic and contact point (CP) analyses were performed using a 2D/3D registration method, in which a 3D bone model created from computed tomography images was matched to knee lateral fluoroscopic images and analysed on a personal computer. Results In the kinematic analysis, the femur translated 37.5 mm posteriorly and rotated 19.8° externally relative to the tibia during the knee flexion phase. During the knee extension phase, the femur translated 36.4 mm anteriorly, which was almost the same amount as in the knee flexion phase. However, the femur rotated only 7.4° internally during the knee extension phase. In the CP analysis, the amount of anterior translation of the CP in the knee extension phase was greater in the medial CP and smaller in the lateral CP than that of posterior translation in the knee flexion phase. Conclusions In kneeling, there was a difference in the rotational kinematics between the flexion phase and the extension phase. The kinematic difference between the flexion and extension phases may have some effect on the meniscus and articular cartilage.

Background: Kneeling is necessary for certain religious and ceremonial occasions, crouching work, and gardening, which many people take part in worldwide. However, there have been few reports about kneeling activities. The purpose of this study was to clarify the kinematics of kneeling. Methods: The subjects were 15 healthy young males. Kneeling activity was analysed within a knee flexion angle from 100° to maximum flexion (maxflex, mean ± SD = 161.3 ± 3.2°). The kinematic and contact point (CP) analyses were performed using a 2D/3D registration method, in which a 3D bone model created from computed tomography images was matched to knee lateral fluoroscopic images and analysed on a personal computer. Results: In the kinematic analysis, the femur translated 37.5 mm posteriorly and rotated 19.8° externally relative to the tibia during the knee flexion phase. During the knee extension phase, the femur translated 36.4 mm anteriorly, which was almost the same amount as in the knee flexion phase. However, the femur rotated only 7.4° internally during the knee extension phase. In the CP analysis, the amount of anterior translation of the CP in the knee extension phase was greater in the medial CP and smaller in the lateral CP than that of posterior translation in the knee flexion phase. Conclusions: In kneeling, there was a difference in the rotational kinematics between the flexion phase and the extension phase. The kinematic difference between the flexion and extension phases may have some effect on the meniscus and articular cartilage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although three-dimensional (3D) glenohumeral (GH) motion has generally been expressed only by rotational elements, its mechanistic details, including GH rotations, remain unknown owing to a lack of geometric investigations. This study aims to investigate the positional relationship between the contact path and humeral tuberosities at the GH joint during arm elevation and to consider the mechanism of GH kinematics. Shoulder kinematics were captured using two-dimensional and 3D single-plane image registration techniques in 15 young healthy subjects during flexion, scaption, and abduction. The glenoid movement relative to the humeral head was calculated to describe the contact path on the humeral head. From the start to 45° of flexion, scaption, and abduction, the glenoid center moved from the anteromedial to the anterior, central, and posterior portions of the humeral head, respectively, as the GH joint rotated externally. From 45° to the maximal elevation for all elevation planes, the glenoid center moved upward to the humeral head and came close to the bicipital groove (BG) at maximal elevation, while the glenoid maintained a constant inclination at 20°–40° relative to the humerus. To investigate this mechanism, the position of humeral tuberosities relative to the glenoid was calculated, and the BG was found to face the supraglenoid tubercle, the attachment site of the long head of biceps (LHB). GH external rotation mainly occurred depending on the elevation planes in the early phase of elevation, and it might be kept constant by the LHB and rotator cuff in the mid- to end range of elevation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]