ARUP; ISBN: 978-0-9562121-5-3 - CMBBE 2012 - Cardiff University

SIMULATION OF DAILY LIVING MOVEMENTS WITH THE
ANYBODY SHOULDER MODEL
1. ABSTRACT
Lemieux P.O. 1 , Séguin A. 1 , Nuño N. 1-2 , Hagemeister N. 1-2
The present numerical study compared the forces estimations of two daily living
activities (ADL) with pure “abduction/flexion” tasks, in order to better understand the
kinetic differences between ADL and pure “abduction/flexion”. The AnyBody Shoulder
model was used to simulate two ADL (hair combing and reaching a top shelf 60 cm in
front of the head) as well as pure abduction and flexion. Both the peak value and the
stability ratios (inferosuperior and anteroposterior) of the glenohumeral resultant force
(GHRF) were computed and compared between the different movements. In accordance
with the literature, reaching a top shelf produced the highest GHRF, followed by
abduction, flexion and hair combing. The highest variation of stability ratio was
observed during abduction and hair combing. The present study suggests that pure
“abduction/flexion” tasks produce peak GHRF similar to ADL. However, each
movement seems to produce distinct stability ratios. During the task of reaching a top
shelf, a high superior stability ratio of the GHRF was estimated by the model (i.e.
GHRF pointing near the superior border of the glenoid cavity). Further investigation is
needed to show if such movement is more sensitive to massive rotator cuff tear.
2. INTRODUCTION
Upper limb gesture is commonly involved in activities of daily living (ADL) such as
personal hygiene, self-feeding, and lifting/carrying tasks (van Andel, Wolterbeek,
Doorenbosch, Veeger, & Harlaar, 2008). However, some recent studies still consider
simple movements such as pure abduction or flexion (Lemieux, Hagemeister, Tetreault,
& Nuño, 2012; Nikooyan et al., 2010). These movements are easy to reproduce in an
experimental or numerical environment, but their clinical relevance may be limited,
since most ADL involve a complex combination of humerus plane of elevation,
elevation and axial rotation (van Andel et al., 2008). Thus, a recent trend is to focus on
ADL instead of “abduction/flexion” (Bergmann et al., 2007).
Comparing pure “abduction/flexion” to ADL may help to better understand the kinetic
differences between these two types of movement. The studies of Magermans,
Chadwick, Veeger, and van der Helm (2005) and van Andel et al. (2008) already
highlighted the complex kinematics of various common ADL including hair combing
and reaching tasks. However, the interpretation of kinematic data remains limited if the
kinetic aspect is not considered. To date, few ADL kinetic data estimated from
numerical analysis is available in the literature.
1 Laboratoire de recherche en imagerie en orthopédie (LIO), École de technologie supérieure, Montréal, CA
2 Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CHUM), Pavillon Notre-Dame, Montréal, CA