The effect of test methodology on apparent compressive stiffness of tibiofemoral joint specimens.

Abstract

Several investigators have analysed the compressive load bearing properties of the knee. Careful review of these force/displacement data showed considerable variation, with some investigators reporting displacements 12-15 x higher than others for nearly identical testing conditions using the same animal model. In this study, we sought to determine if this variability was inherent in the tibiofemoral joint or if differences in experimental methodology explained the variation. Compressive force/displacement curves were obtained from 39 normal canine tibiofemoral specimens mounted in a universal testing machine. Two commonly reported methods of measuring compressive displacement were used simultaneously. The testing machine crosshead displacement was used as one measure of displacement of the joint. The other method consisted of extensometers mounted to bone at the joint line. Resultant joint rotation in the parasagittal plane was also measured. Using either approach, we found comparatively little variation among the 39 specimens tested. However, the crosshead displacement measurements diverged from the extensometer measurements as the compressive load increased. At 770 N, the crosshead measurement was nearly twice the extensometer displacement. Further analysis showed that the compliances differed by a uniform amount. Parasagittal joint rotation, as measured by the extensometers, was minimal--less than one half of one degree. Although our loading fixtures were expected to be rigid under the loads used, these data suggest that the deformation of the bone and loading fixtures was responsible for the differences we observed, and may be responsible for the variation in compressive displacement results among several published studies. A model is presented which uses a simple elastic element to represent this deformation.