A comparison of passive flexion–extension to normal gait in the ovine stifle joint

Abstract Obtaining accurate values of joint tissue loads in human subjects and animals in vivo requires exact 3D-reproduction of joint kinematics and comparisons of in vivo motions between subjects and animals, and also necessitates an accurate reference position. For the knee, passive flexion–extension of isolated joints by hand has been assumed to produce bony motions similar to those of normal gait. We hypothesized that passive flexion–extension kinematics would not accurately reproduce in vivo gait, and, further, that such kinematics would vary significantly between testers. In vivo gait motions of four ovine stifle joints were measured in six degrees of freedom, as were passive flexion–extension motions after sacrifice. Passive flexion–extension motions were performed by three testers on the same stifle joints used in vitro . Results showed statistically significant differences in all degrees of freedom, with the largest differences in the proximal–distal and internal–external directions. Differences induced by muscle loads and kinetic factors in vivo were most evident during stance and hoof-off phases of gait. The in vitro passive paths generated by hand created motions with large variability both between and within individual testers. The user dependence and “area” of motion of passive flexion–extension indicates that passive flexion–extension is contained in a volume of motion, rather than constrained to a unique path. The assumption that the passive path has relevance to precise bone positions during normal in vivo gait is not supported by these results. Thus, using passive flexion–extension as a reference between joints may introduce large motion variability in the observed outcome, and large potential errors in determining joint tissue loads.