Can Non-Translational Simplified Tasks Mimic Knee Kinematics During Gait? A Comparative Study of Tibiofemoral ICR...

Understanding knee kinematics during gait is essential for the design of prostheses, orthoses, and biomimetic mechanisms. In many biomechanical analyses, tibiofemoral motion is simplified to the sagittal plane, allowing the locus of the instantaneous center of rotation (ICR) to describe joint kinematics derived from the instantaneous axis of rotation (IAR). However, it remains unclear whether ICR trajectories obtained from simplified flexion-extension tasks can represent those observed during gait. This study analyzes the sagittal-plane trajectory of the tibiofemoral ICR during gait swing, standing swing, seated swing, and squat. Motion data from 21 healthy participants were captured using videogrammetry, and the instantaneous axis of rotation (IAR) was computed from homogeneous transformation matrices using the Mozzi-Chasles theorem. Sagittal-plane ICR trajectories were derived and compared within subjects across tasks. Significant differences were found between gait and all other movements in both trajectory shape and spatial position. The shape metric (S), which quantifies differences in trajectory geometry, showed mean values ranging from 0.82 to 1.04 with very large effect sizes (Cohen's d = 2.90 to 4.47, p < 0.0001). The centroid distance metric (M), which measures the overall spatial displacement between trajectories, indicated positional differences ranging from 8.15 mm to 12.37 mm between trajectories also showing very large effect sizes (Cohen's = 1.72-3.40, p < 0.0001). Additionally, the mean deviation of the IAR from the sagittal plane ranged from 14° to 18° during gait, whereas smaller deviations were observed in non-weight-bearing swing movements. These results demonstrate that tibiofemoral ICR trajectories are task-dependent and that simplified flexion-extension tasks do not fully reproduce the knee kinematics observed during gait. Consequently, the use of gait-derived ICR trajectories, together with their variability, provides a more suitable basis for the design and optimization of polycentric mechanisms, enabling the development of devices that more closely replicate real biomechanics and are potentially better adapted to the user.