Evaluation of EMG-assisted and EMG-driven control modes in patients with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis

Cava, Dominique; Birmingham, Trevor; Diamond, Laura E.; Leitch, Kristyn; Willing, Ryan

Affiliations

¹Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London Ontario, Canada

²School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London Ontario, Canada

³Wolf Orthopaedic Biomechanics Laboratory, Fowler Kennedy Sport Medicine Clinic, Western University, London Ontario, Canada

⁴Australian Centre for Precision Health and Technology (PRECISE), Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

⁵School of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

⁶Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Western University, London Ontario, Canada

Abstract and keywords

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is associated with higher-than-normal knee joint contact forces (KJCFs) during walking which cannot be easily measured. KJCFs can be estimated using neuromusculoskeletal (NMSK) modelling in electromyogram (EMG)-driven and −assisted control modes. Previous research has not examined which control mode is most appropriate for estimating KJCFs in patients with knee OA. This study aimed to evaluate a NMSK modelling framework using both control modes in patients with medial-dominant knee OA. First, EMG-assisted mode was hypothesized to better track ID-computed joint moments. Second, KJCFs estimated using the two control modes were hypothesized to differ.

Gait data were measured from 27 patients with medial-dominant tibiofemoral knee OA. An OpenSim model was scaled to patient-specific anthropometrics. Inverse kinematics, inverse dynamics, and muscle analysis were performed. Resulting joint angles, moments, musculotendon kinematics, and muscle activations were input into the Calibrated Electromyography Informed Neuromusculoskeletal Modelling Toolbox. Muscle forces and KJCFs were estimated using EMG-driven and −assisted control modes.

EMG-assisted mode better tracked knee flexion moments (RMSE = 2.7 ± 2.1Nm, R² = 0.9 ± 0.1) and estimated a higher, albeit non-significant, second peak medial compartment KJCF (2.3 ± 1.1BW) compared to EMG-driven mode (RMSE = 12.6 ± 3.9Nm, R² = 0.6 ± 0.2, KJCF = 2.1 ± 0.9BW). EMG-assisted control mode may therefore be more appropriate for evaluating KJCFs in patients with knee OA.

Keywords: Musculoskeletal modelling; Electromyography informed neuromusculoskeletal modelling; Gait simulation; Joint contact forces; Patient-specific models

Links

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112773

PubMed: 40413985

WoS: 001500458800003

History

Accepted: 2025-05-20

Online: 2025-05-21

Cited Works (14)

Year	Entry
2006	Andriacchi TP, Mündermann A. The role of ambulatory mechanics in the initiation and progression of knee osteoarthritis. Curr Opin Rhuematol. September 2006;18(5):514-518.
2007	Delp SL, Anderson FC, Arnold AS, Loan P, Habib A, John CT, Guendelman E, Thelen DG. OpenSim: open-source software to create and analyze dynamic simulations of movement. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. November 2007;54(11):1940-1950.
2007	Zhao D, Banks SA, Mitchell KH, D'Lima DD, Colwell CW Jr, Fregly BJ. Correlation between the knee adduction torque and medial contact force for a variety of gait patterns. J Orthop Res. June 2007;25(6):789-797.
2002	Miyazaki T, Wada M, Kawahara H, Sato M, Baba H, Shimada S. Dynamic load at baseline can predict radiographic disease progression in medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. July 2002;61(6):617-622.
2013	Gerus P, Sartori M, Besier TF, Fregly BJ, Delp SL, Banks SA, Pandy MG, D'Lima DD, Lloyd DG. Subject-specific knee joint geometry improves predictions of medial tibiofemoral contact forces. J Biomech. November 15, 2013;46(16):2778-2786.
2015	Pizzolato C, Lloyd DG, Sartori M, Ceseracciu E, Besier TF, Fregly BJ, Reggiani M. CEINMS: a toolbox to investigate the influence of different neural control solutions on the prediction of muscle excitation and joint moments during dynamic motor tasks. J Biomech. November 5, 2015;48(14):3929-3936.
2003	Lloyd DG, Besier TF. An EMG-driven musculoskeletal model to estimate muscle forces and knee joint moments in vivo. J Biomech. June 2003;36(6):765-776.
2014	Sartori M, Farina D, Lloyd DG. Hybrid neuromusculoskeletal modeling to best track joint moments using a balance between muscle excitations derived from electromyograms and optimization. J Biomech. November 28, 2014;47(15):3613-3621.
2010	Hamner SR, Seth A, Delp SL. Muscle contributions to propulsion and support during running. J Biomech. October 19, 2010;43(14):2709-2716.
2015	Hicks JL, Uchida TK, Seth A, Rajagopal A, Delp SL. Is my model good enough? best practices for verification and validation of musculoskeletal models and simulations of movement. J Biomech Eng. February 2015;137(2):020905.
2009	Winby CR, Lloyd DG, Besier TF, Kirk TB. Muscle and external load contribution to knee joint contact loads during normal gait. J Biomech. October 16, 2009;42(14):2294-2300.
2010	De Luca CJ, Donald Gilmore L, Kuznetsov M, Roy SH. Filtering the surface EMG signal: movement artifact and baseline noise contamination. J Biomech. May 28, 2010;43(8):1573-1579.
2023	De Pieri E, Nüesch C, Pagenstert G, Viehweger E, Egloff C, Mündermann A. High tibial osteotomy effectively redistributes compressive knee loads during walking. J Orthop Res. March 2023;41(3):591-600.
2010	Pataky TC. Generalized n-dimensional biomechanical field analysis using statistical parametric mapping. J Biomech. July 20, 2010;43(10):1976-1982.