Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 27, 2026

Subject-specific Musculoskeletal Model for Studying Bone Strain During Dynamic Motion
Published on: April 11, 2018
Healthy morphological variability in sagittal alignment modulates loading patterns in musculoskeletal spine modelling
Simone Borrelli1, Valentina Benna1, Giovanni Putame1
1Polito(BIO)Med Lab, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy; Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Abstract:
Spinal sagittal alignment (SSA) is a primary determinant of spinal loading and stability. While biomechanical research frequently addresses major spinal deformities, the impact of healthy morphological variability remains underrepresented in musculoskeletal modelling, as conventional models typically assume a generic, "one-size-fits-all" curvature for non-deformed alignments. Using SSA4MSK tool, an open-source standalone Matlab application here introduced for the automatic integration of subject-specific SSA into OpenSim musculoskeletal models, this study quantifies the bias in spinal load estimation introduced by adopting a generic rather than subject-specific alignment. The analysis is conducted across the healthy morphological spectrum described by the Roussouly types (RT1-RT4) classification. The study also characterises how spinal load distribution differs across morphotypes along the thoracolumbar chain.Through a virtual cohort of 1586 models derived from 122 female subjects, models with generic alignment were found to introduce systematic bias in intervertebral joint compression of up to ±15%. For flat profiles (RT1), generic models underestimate compression by up to 80N, for hyperlordotic profiles (RT4), generic models overestimate compression with deviations scaling with upper body mass and sensitivity coefficients reaching 2N/kg. Conversely, generic models proved largely valid for intermediate morphotypes (RT2, RT3). Across RT1-RT4 the lumbar apex position substantially modulates anteroposterior shear forces, even at comparable global lordosis magnitudes, with inter-morphotype variations exceeding 0.24N per unit body weight at L1L2 and L3L4. These findings demonstrate that generic alignment does not adequately represent spinal load variability across the healthy alignment spectrum, particularly for flat and hyperlordotic profiles, and that SSA4MSK provides a robust framework to address this limitation.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Deformation of Member under Multiple Loadings
In the case of a member with a variable cross-section, the strain is not constant but depends on the position. The deformation of an...
Eccentric Axial Loading in a Plane of Symmetry
Normal Strain under Axial Loading
General Case of Eccentric Axial Loading
Consider a member subjected to equal and opposite forces that are applied along a line that does not coincide with the member's neutral axis. In unsymmetrical...
Relation between Poisson's ratio, Modulus of Elasticity and Modulus of Rigidity
Deformations in a Transverse Cross Section
As the material stretches, it expands or contracts in orthogonal directions to the load. This phenomenon varies...

