The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Realistic loads for testing hip implants
Abstract
The aim here was to define realistic load conditions for hip implants, based on in vivo contact force measurements, and to see whether current ISO standards indeed simulate real loads. The load scenarios obtained are based on in vivo hip contact forces measured in 4 patients during different activities and on activity records from 31 patients. The load scenarios can be adapted to various test purposes by applying average or high peak loads, high-impact activities or additional low-impact activities, and by simulating normal or very active patients. The most strenuous activities are walking (average peak forces 1800 N, high peak forces 3900 N), going up stairs (average peak forces 1900 N, high peak forces 4200 N) and stumbling (high peak forces 11,000 N). Torsional moments are 50% higher for going up stairs than for walking. Ten million loading cycles simulate an implantation time of 3.9 years in active patients. The in vitro fatigue properties of cementless implant fixations are exceeded during stumbling. At least for heavyweight and very active subjects, the real load conditions are more critical than those defined by the ISO standards for fatigue tests.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Benedetti, M., du Plessis, A., Ritchie, R. O., Dallago, M., Razavi, N., & Berto, F. (2021) · Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports · doi:10.1016/j.mser.2021.100606 · Cited by 788
Ng, K. C. G., Lamontagne, M., Labrosse, M. R., & Beaulé, P. E. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147813 · Cited by 54
Metadata
- Authors
- Bergmann, G., Graichen, F., Rohlmann, A., Bender, A., Heinlein, B., Duda, G. N., Heller, M. O., & Morlock, M. M.
- Venue
- Bio-Medical Materials and Engineering
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 65-75
- ISSN
- 0959-2989 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1893199803
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.56
- 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
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.