BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee joint is a common disease accompanied by pain and impaired mobility. Despite some recent concerns on the lack of correlation between the medial load and the knee adduction moment (KAM), KAM is routinely considered as a surrogate measure of medial load and hence a marker where its reduction is the main focus of preventive and treatment interventions.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Determine the relative sensitivity of the tibiofemoral medial-lateral contact load partitioning to changes in the knee adduction angle (KAA) versus KAM.

METHODS

Using a lower extremity hybrid musculoskeletal (MS) model driven by gait kinematics and kinetics, we compute here in asymptomatic subjects the sensitivity of the knee joint biomechanical response (muscle and ligament forces) in general and medial/lateral load partitioning in particular to the relative changes in the reported KAA versus changes in reported KAM (both by one standard deviation).

RESULTS

As KAA increased (at constant KAM), so did the passive moment resistance of the knee joint which as a result and at all stance periods substantially reduced forces in lateral hamstrings while increasing those in medial hamstrings. At 25% and 75% stance as two highly loaded periods of gait, the drop in KAA (from + SD to -SD while at constant KAM) drastically reduced the medial contact force by 44% and 30% and the medial over lateral contact load and area ratios by 92% and 79% as well as 64% and 51%, respectively. In contrast, the equivalent alterations in KAM (by ± SD at constant KAA) had lower and less consistent effects (<7%) showing much smaller sensitivity to changes in KAM alone. Ligament forces altered at various stance periods with inconsistent trends; peak values of 418 N in the anterior cruciate ligament (90% carried by the posterolateral bundle) and 1056 N in the patellar tendon were computed both at 25% stance and minimum KAA.

SIGNIFICANCE

These findings indicate a poor correlation between KAM and tibiofemoral load distribution suggesting instead that KAA and knee alignment should be in focus as the primary marker of knee joint load partitioning and associated prevention and treatment interventions.