Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Fracture Prediction for the Proximal Femur Using Finite Element Models: Part I—Linear Analysis

Lotz, J. C., Cheal, E. J., Hayes, W. C.·1991·Journal of Biomechanical Engineering

Abstract

Over 90 percent of the more than 250,000 hip fractures that occur annually in the United States are the result of falls from standing height. Despite this, the stresses associated with femoral fracture from a fall have not been investigated previously. Our objectives were to use three-dimensional finite element models of the proximal femur (with geometries and material properties based directly on quantitative computed tomography) to compare predicted stress distributions for one-legged stance and for a fall to the lateral greater trochanter. We also wished to test the correspondence between model predictions and in vitro strain gage data and failure loads for cadaveric femora subjected to these loading conditions. An additional goal was to use the model predictions to compare the sensitivity of several imaging sites in the proximal femur which are used for the in vivo prediction of hip fracture risk. In this first of two parts, linear finite element models of two unpaired human cadaveric femora were generated. In Part II, the models were extended to include nonlinear material properties for the cortical and trabecular bone. While there was poor correspondence between strain gage data and model predictions, there was excellent agreement between the in vitro failure data and the linear model, especially using a von Mises effective strain failure criterion. Both the onset of structural yielding (within 22 and 4 percent) and the load at fracture (within 8 and 5 percent) were predicted accurately for the two femora tested. For the simulation of one-legged stance, the peak stresses occurred in the primary compressive trabeculae of the subcapital region. However, for a simulated fall, the peak stresses were in the intertrochanteric region. The Ward’s triangle (basicervical) site commonly used for the clinical assessment of osteoporosis was not heavily loaded in either situation. These findings suggest that the intertrochanteric region may be the most sensitive site for the assessment of fracture risk due to a fall and the subcapital region for fracture risk due to repetitive activities such as walking.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1115/1.2895412

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Lotz, J. C., Cheal, E. J., & Hayes, W. C.
Venue
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
Published
1991-11-01
Volume
113
Issue
4
Pages
353-360
ISSN
  • 0148-0731 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-8951
OpenAlex
W2081081045
Cited by
309
References
0
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fracture Prediction for the Proximal Femur Using Finite Element Models: Part I—Linear Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1115/1.2895412
The paper
Lotz, J. C., Cheal, E. J., & Hayes, W. C. (1991). Fracture Prediction for the Proximal Femur Using Finite Element Models: Part I—Linear Analysis. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2895412

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.