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
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.
Generic spinal alignment models introduce significant bias in spinal load estimations, particularly for flat and hyperlordotic spinal sagittal alignment (SSA) profiles. Subject-specific SSA integration is crucial for accurate biomechanical analysis.
Area of Science:
- Biomechanical Engineering
- Musculoskeletal Modeling
- Spinal Biomechanics
Background:
- Spinal sagittal alignment (SSA) is critical for spinal loading and stability.
- Musculoskeletal models often use generic spinal curvatures, neglecting healthy morphological variations.
- This underrepresentation limits the accuracy of spinal load estimations in biomechanical research.
Purpose of the Study:
- To quantify the bias in spinal load estimation caused by using generic versus subject-specific spinal sagittal alignment in musculoskeletal models.
- To introduce SSA4MSK, an open-source tool for integrating subject-specific SSA into OpenSim models.
- To analyze spinal load distribution across different Roussouly types (RT1-RT4) of healthy spinal morphology.
Main Methods:
- Developed SSA4MSK, a Matlab application for automatic subject-specific SSA integration into OpenSim.
- Created a virtual cohort of 1586 models from 122 female subjects representing Roussouly types (RT1-RT4).
- Quantified intervertebral joint compression and shear forces using generic vs. subject-specific alignments.
Main Results:
- Generic alignment models introduced systematic bias in intervertebral joint compression, up to ±15%.
- Flat (RT1) profiles showed underestimation (up to 80N), while hyperlordotic (RT4) profiles showed overestimation (scaling with body mass).
- Intermediate morphotypes (RT2, RT3) showed less bias; lumbar apex position significantly modulated shear forces across all types.
Conclusions:
- Generic spinal alignment is inadequate for accurately representing spinal load variability across the healthy spectrum, especially for RT1 and RT4 profiles.
- Subject-specific SSA integration, facilitated by tools like SSA4MSK, is essential for precise musculoskeletal modeling of spinal loading.
- Understanding morphotype-specific spinal loading is crucial for advancing biomechanical research and clinical applications.
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...

