Empirical joint contact mechanics measurement (EJCM; e.g. contact area or force, surface velocities) enables critical investigations of the relationship between changing joint mechanics and the impact on surface-to-surface interactions. In orthopedic biomechanics, understanding the changes to cartilage contact mechanics following joint pathology or aging is critical due to its suggested role in the increased risk of osteoarthritis (OA), which might be due to changed kinematics and kinetics that alter the contact patterns within a joint. This article reviews and discusses EJCM approaches that have been applied to articulating joints such that readers across different disciplines will be informed of the various measurement and analysis techniques used in this field. The approaches reviewed include classical measurement approaches (radiographic and sectioning, dye staining, casting, surface proximity, and pressure measurement), stereophotogrammetry/motion analysis, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and high-speed videoradiography. Perspectives on approaches to advance this field of EJCM are provided, including the value of considering relative velocity in joints, tractional stress, quantification of joint contact area shape, consideration of normalization techniques, net response (superposition) of multiple input variables, and establishing linkages to regional cartilage health status. EJCM measures continue to provide insights to advance our understanding of cartilage health and degeneration and provide avenues to assess the efficacy and guide future directions of developing interventions (e.g. surgical, biological, rehabilitative) to optimize joint’s health and function long term.
LiGDeFrateLEParkSE, et al. In vivo articular cartilage contact kinematics of the knee: an investigation using dual-orthogonal fluoroscopy and magnetic resonance image-based computer models. Am J Sports Med2005; 33: 102–107.
2.
GreenwaldASHaynesDW.Weight-bearing areas in the human hip joint. J Bone Joint Surg1972; 54: 157–163.
3.
KobayashiTSuzukiEYamazakiN, et al. In vivo talocrural joint contact mechanics with functional ankle instability. Foot Ankle Spec2015; 8: 445–453.
4.
MassiminiDFLiGWarnerJP.Glenohumeral contact kinematics in patients after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg2010; 92: 916–926.
5.
ShannonHLDeluceSRLaloneEA, et al. Effect of radial head implant shape on joint contact area and location during static loading. J Hand Surg Am2015; 40: 716–722.
6.
MartinSMMoranJMStahurskiTM, et al. A technique for determining prosthetic joint contact areas. J Biomech1984; 17: 545.
7.
TashmanSCollonDAndersonK, et al. Abnormal rotational knee motion during running after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Am J Sports Med2004; 32: 975–983.
8.
HippJASuganoNMillisMB, et al. Planning acetabular redirection osteotomies based on joint contact pressures. Clin Orthop Relat Res1999; 364: 134–143.
9.
PowersCMWardSRChanLD, et al. The effect of bracing on patella alignment and patellofemoral joint contact area. Med Sci Sports Exerc2004; 36: 1226–1232.
10.
AndriacchiTPMündermannASmithRL, et al. A framework for the in vivo pathomechanics of osteoarthritis at the knee. Ann Biomed Eng2004; 32: 447–457.
11.
TummalaSNielsenMLillholmM, et al. Automatic quantification of tibio-femoral contact area and congruity. IEEE Trans Med Imaging2012; 31: 1404–1412.
12.
MaquetPGVan de BergAJSimonetJC.Femorotibial weight-bearing areas. Experimental determination. J Bone Joint Surg Am1975; 57: 766–771.
13.
KettlekampDBJacobsAW.Tibiofemoral contact area-determination and implications. J Bone Joint Surg1972; 54: 349–356.
14.
HermanSJaklicAHermanS, et al. Hip stress reduction after Chiari osteotomy. Med Biol Eng Comput2002; 40: 369–375.
15.
PompeBAntolicVMavcicB, et al. Hip joint contact stress as an additional parameter for determining hip dysplasia in adults: comparison with Severin’s classification. Med Sci Monit2007; 13: CR215–CR219.
16.
YoshidaHFaustAWilckensJ, et al. Three-dimensional dynamic hip contact area and pressure distribution during activities of daily living. J Biomech2006; 39: 1996–2004.
17.
ArmandMLepistöJTallrothK, et al. Outcome of periacetabular osteotomy: joint contact pressure calculation using standing AP radiographs, 12 patients followed for average 2 years. Acta Orthop2005; 76: 303–313.
18.
GendaEIwasakiNLiG, et al. Normal hip joint contact pressure distribution in single-leg standing-effect of gender and anatomic parameters. J Biomech2001; 34: 895–905.
19.
WalkerPSHajekJV.The load-bearing area in the knee joint. J Biomech1972; 5: 581–589.
20.
StormontTJAnKNMorreyBF, et al. Elbow joint contact study: Comparison of techniques. J Biomech1985; 18: 329–336.
21.
WillingRLapnerMLaloneEA, et al. Development of a computational technique to measure cartilage contact area. J Biomech2014; 47: 1193–1197.
22.
SaboMTShannonHNgJ, et al. The impact of capitellar arthroplasty on elbow contact mechanics: Implications for implant design. Clin Biomech2011; 26: 458–463.
23.
ScherrerPKHillberryBMVan SickleDC.Determining the in-vivo areas of contact in the canine shoulder. J Biomech Eng1979; 101: 271–278.
24.
UpadhyayNVollansSRSeedhomBB, et al. Effect of patellar tendon shortening on tracking of the patella. Am J Sports Med2005; 33: 1565–1574.
25.
MoranJMHemannJHGreenwaldAS.Finger joint contact areas and pressures. J Orthop Res1985; 3: 49–55.
26.
RamseyPLHamiltonW.Changes in tibiotalar area of contact caused by lateral talar shift. J Bone Joint Surg1976; 58: 356–357.
27.
HuntKJGoebYBehnAW, et al. Ankle joint contact loads and displacement with progressive syndesmotic injury. Foot Ankle Int2015; 36: 1095–1103.
28.
LiGDeFrateLEZayontzS, et al. The effect of tibiofemoral joint kinematics on patellofemoral contact pressures under simulated muscle loads. J Orthop Res2004; 22: 801–806.
29.
ShapiroTAMcGarryMHGuptaR, et al. Biomechanical effects of glenoid retroversion in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2007; 16: S90–S95.
30.
ZhuQAParkYBSjovoldSG, et al. Can extra-articular strains be used to measure facet contact forces in the lumbar spine? An in-vitro biomechanical study. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2008; 222: 171–184.
31.
AteshianGASoslowskyLJMowVC.Quantitation of articular surface topography and cartilage thickness in knee joints using stereophotogrammetry. J Biomech1991; 24: 761–776.
32.
HsuHCLuoZPRandJA, et al. Influence of patellar thickness on patellar tracking and patellofemoral contact characteristics after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty1996; 11: 69–80.
33.
HsuHCLuoZPRandJA, et al. Influence of lateral release on patellar tracking and patellofemoral contact characteristics after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty1997; 12: 74–83.
34.
RonskyJLBoydSKLichtiDD, et al. Precise measurement of cat patellofemoral joint surface geometry with multistation digital photogrammetry. J Biomech Eng1999; 121: 196–205.
35.
BoydSKRonskyJLLichtiDD, et al. Joint surface modeling with thin-plate splines. J Biomech Eng1999; 121: 525–532.
36.
BeveridgeJEShriveNGFrankCB.Meniscectomy causes significant in vivo kinematic changes and mechanically induced focal chondral lesions in a sheep model. J Orthop Res2011; 29: 1397–1405.
37.
BeveridgeJEHeardBJShriveNG, et al. Tibiofemoral centroid velocity correlates more consistently with cartilage damage than does contact path length in two ovine models of stifle injury. J Orthop Res2013; 31: 1745–1756.
38.
BeveridgeJEHeardBJBrownJJ, et al. A new measure of tibiofemoral subchondral bone interactions that correlates with early cartilage damage in injured sheep. J Orthop Res2014; 32: 1371–1380.
39.
AteshianGAKwakSDSoslowskyLJ, et al. A stereophotogrammetric method for determining in situ contact areas in diarthrodial joints, and a comparison with other methods. J Biomech1994; 27: 111–124.
40.
KuraHKitaokaHBLuoZP, et al. Measurement of surface contact area of the ankle joint. Clin Biomech1998; 13: 365–370.
41.
KitaokaHBLuoZPAnKN.Contact features of the talonavicular joint of the foot. Clin Orthop Relat Res1996; 325: 290–295.
42.
KelkarRWangVMFlatowEL, et al. Glenohumeral mechanics: a study of articular geometry, contact, and kinematics. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2001; 10: 73–84.
43.
StokKSBeslerBASteinerTH, et al. Three-dimensional quantitative morphometric analysis (QMA) for in situ joint and tissue assessment of osteoarthritis in a preclinical rabbit disease model. PLoS One2016; 11: e0147564.
44.
DejardinLMPerryRLArnoczkySP.The effect of triple pelvic osteotomy on the articular contact area of the hip joint in dysplastic dogs: an in vitro experimental study. Vet Surg1998; 27: 194–202.
45.
LaloneEAMcDonaldCPFerreiraLM, et al. Development of an image-based technique to examine joint congruency at the elbow. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2013; 16: 280–290.
46.
OmoriSMoritomoHOmokawaS, et al. In vivo 3-dimensional analysis of dorsal intercalated segment instability deformity secondary to scapholunate dissociation: a preliminary report. J Hand Surg2013; 38: 1346–1355.
47.
RainbowMJKamalRNLeventhalE, et al. In vivo kinematics of the scaphoid, lunate, capitate, and third metacarpal in extreme wrist flexion and extension. J Hand Surg2013; 38: 278–288.
48.
GotoALengSSugamotoK, et al. In vivo pilot study evaluating the thumb carpometacarpal joint during circumduction. Clin Orthop Relat Res2014; 472: 1106–1113.
49.
SalsichGBWardSRTerkMR, et al. In vivo assessment of patellofemoral joint contact area in individuals who are pain free. Clin Orthop Relat Res2003; 417: 277–284.
50.
WardSRPowersCM.The influence of patella alta on patellofemoral joint stress during normal and fast walking. Clin Biomech2004; 19: 1040–1047.
51.
WardSRTerkMRPowersCM.Patella alta: Association with patellofemoral alignment and changes in contact area during weight-bearing. J Bone Jt Surg - Ser A2007; 89: 1749–1755.
52.
McWalterEJO’KaneCMFitzpatrickDP, et al. Validation of an MRI-based method to assess patellofemoral joint contact areas in loaded knee flexion in vivo. J Magn Reson Imaging2014; 39: 978–987.
53.
IslamKDukeKMustafyT, et al. A geometric approach to study the contact mechanisms in the patellofemoral joint of normal versus patellofemoral pain syndrome subjects. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2015; 18: 391–400.
54.
BarrancePJGadeVAllenJ, et al. American Society of Biomechanics Clinical Biomechanics Award 2013: Tibiofemoral contact location changes associated with lateral heel wedging–a weight bearing MRI study. Clin Biomech2014; 29: 997–1002.
55.
AllenJGadeVBarrancePJ. Validation of an MRI-based method to measure tibiofemoral cartilage contact area. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2011 summer bioengineering conference, 2011, pp.387–388. New York: ASME.
56.
BorotikarBSSipprellWh3rdWibleEE, et al. A methodology to accurately quantify patellofemoral cartilage contact kinematics by combining 3D image shape registration and cine-PC MRI velocity data. J Biomech2012; 45: 1117–1122.
57.
BodenBPBreitISheehanFT.Tibiofemoral alignment: contributing factors to noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injury. J Bone Joint Surg2009; 91: 2381–2389.
58.
HinterwimmerSGotthardtMvon Eisenhart-RotheR, et al. In vivo contact areas of the knee in patients with patellar subluxation. J Biomech2005; 38: 2095–2101.
59.
WretenbergPRamseyDKNémethG.Tibiofemoral contact points relative to flexion angle measured with MRI. Clin Biomech2002; 17: 477–485.
60.
BesierTFDraperCEGoldGE, et al. Patellofemoral joint contact area increases with knee flexion and weight-bearing. J Orthop Res2005; 23: 345–350.
61.
Heino BrechterJPowersCMTerkMR, et al. Quantification of patellofemoral joint contact area using magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging2003; 21: 955–959.
62.
ChiuJKWongYMYungPS, et al. The effects of quadriceps strengthening on pain, function, and patellofemoral joint contact area in persons with patellofemoral pain. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2012; 91: 98–106.
63.
ClarkDASimpsonDLEldridgeJ, et al. Patellar instability and quadriceps avoidance affect walking knee moments. Knee2016; 23: 78–84.
64.
PowersCMWardSRChenYJ, et al. Effect of bracing on patellofemoral joint stress while ascending and descending stairs. Clin J Sport Med2004; 14: 206–214.
65.
AkiyamaKSakaiTKoyanagiJ, et al. In vivo hip joint contact distribution and bony impingement in normal and dysplastic human hips. J Orthopaed Res2013; 31: 1611–1619.
66.
BuchanLLZhangHKonanS, et al. Open-MRI measures of cam intrusion for hips in an anterior impingement position relate to acetabular contact force. J Orthop Res2016; 34: 205–216.
67.
Goislard de MonsabertBVigourouxLBendahanD, et al. Quantification of finger joint loadings using musculoskeletal modelling clarifies mechanical risk factors of hand osteoarthritis. Med Eng Phys2014; 36: 177–184.
68.
FischerKJJohnsonJEWallerAJ, et al. MRI-Based modeling for radiocarpal joint mechanics : validation criteria and results for four specimen-specific models. J Biomech Eng2018; 133: 1–7.
69.
BanksSAHodgeWA.Accurate measurement of three-dimensional knee replacement kinematics using single-plane fluoroscopy. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng1996; 43: 638–649.
70.
FengYTsaiT-YLiJS, et al. Motion of the femoral condyles in flexion and extension during a continuous lunge. J Orthop Res2015; 33: 591–597.
71.
TorryMRShelburneKBPetersonDS, et al. Knee kinematic profiles during drop landings: a biplane fluoroscopy study. Med Sci Sports Exerc2011; 43: 533–541.
72.
TorryMRMyersCShelburneKB, et al. Relationship of knee shear force and extensor moment on knee translations in females performing drop landings: a biplane fluoroscopy study. Clin Biomech2011; 26: 1019–1024.
73.
LiJSHosseiniACancreL, et al. Kinematic characteristics of the tibiofemoral joint during a step-up activity. Gait Posture2013; 38: 712–716.
74.
SuzukiTHosseiniALiJS, et al. In vivo patellar tracking and patellofemoral cartilage contacts during dynamic stair ascending. J Biomech2012; 45: 2432–2437.
75.
MyersCATorryMRShelburneKB, et al. In vivo tibiofemoral kinematics during 4 functional tasks of increasing demand using biplane fluoroscopy. Am J Sports Med2012; 40: 170–178.
76.
TashmanSKolowichPCollonD, et al. Dynamic function of the ACL-reconstructed knee during running. Clin Orthop Relat Res2007; 454: 66–73.
77.
LiGKozanekMHosseiniA, et al. New fluoroscopic imaging technique for investigation of 6DOF knee kinematics during treadmill gait. J Orthop Surg Res2009; 4: 6.
78.
GrayHAGuanSThomeerLT, et al. Three-dimensional motion of the knee-joint complex during normal walking revealed by mobile biplane x-ray imaging. J Orthop Res2019; 37: 615–630.
79.
ThorhauerETashmanS.Validation of a method for combining biplanar radiography and magnetic resonance imaging to estimate knee cartilage contact. Med Eng Phys2015; 37: 937–947.
80.
FarrokhiSVoycheckCAKlattBA, et al. Altered tibiofemoral joint contact mechanics and kinematics in patients with knee osteoarthritis and episodic complaints of joint instability. Clin Biomech2014; 29: 629–635.
81.
KobayashiKHosseiniASakamotoM, et al. In vivo kinematics of the extensor mechanism of the knee during deep flexion. J Biomech Eng2013; 135: 81002.
82.
BinghamJTPapannagariRVan de VeldeSK, et al. In vivo cartilage contact deformation in the healthy human tibiofemoral joint. Rheumatology2008; 47: 1622–1627.
83.
HosseiniAVan de VeldeSGillTJ, et al. Tibiofemoral cartilage contact biomechanics in patients after reconstruction of a ruptured anterior cruciate ligament. J Orthop Res2012; 30: 1781–1788.
84.
HoshinoYFuFHIrrgangJJ, et al. Can joint contact dynamics be restored by anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?Clin Orthop Relat Res2013; 471: 2924–2931.
85.
HoshinoYTashmanS.Internal tibial rotation during in vivo, dynamic activity induces greater sliding of tibio-femoral joint contact on the medial compartment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc2012; 20: 1268–1275.
86.
AnderstWJTashmanS.Using relative velocity vectors to reveal axial rotation about the medial and lateral compartment of the knee. J Biomech2010; 43: 994–997.
87.
GustafsonJARobinsonMEFitzgeraldGK, et al. Knee motion variability in patients with knee osteoarthritis: the effect of self-reported instability. Clin Biomech2015; 30: 475–480.
88.
AnderstWJTashmanS.A method to estimate in vivo dynamic articular surface interaction. J Biomech2003; 36: 1291–1299.
89.
AnderstWJLesCTashmanS.In vivo serial joint space measurements during dynamic loading in a canine model of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil2005; 13: 808–816.
90.
TashmanSAnderstW.Predicting cartilage damage from knee kinematics in ACL-deficient dogs. In: 47th Annual meeting transactions of the orthopaedic research society, San Francisco, CA, 2001, p.0660.
91.
BeyMJKlineSKZauelR, et al. In vivo measurement of glenohumeral joint contact patterns. EURASIP J Adv Signal Process2010; 2010: 2–7.
92.
BeyMJPeltzCDCiarelliK, et al. In vivo shoulder function after surgical repair of a torn rotator cuff: glenohumeral joint mechanics, shoulder strength, clinical outcomes, and their interaction. Am J Sports Med2011; 39: 2117–2129.
93.
BoyerPJMassiminiDFGillTJ, et al. In vivo articular cartilage contact at the glenohumeral joint: Preliminary report. J Orthop Sci2008; 13: 359–365.
94.
MassiminiDFWarnerJJLiG.Glenohumeral joint cartilage contact in the healthy adult during scapular plane elevation depression with external humeral rotation. J Biomech2014; 47: 3100–3106.
95.
PeltzCDBaumerTGMendeV, et al. Effect of arthroscopic stabilization on in vivo glenohumeral joint motion and clinical outcomes in patients with anterior instability. Am J Sports Med2015; 43: 2800–2808.
96.
ZhouCChaTWangW, et al. Investigation of alterations in the lumbar disc biomechanics at the adjacent segments after spinal fusion using a combined in vivo and in silico approach. Ann Biomed Eng2021; 49: 601–616.
97.
MowVCAteshianGASpilkerRL.Biomechanics of diarthrodial joints: A review of twenty years of progress. J Biomech Eng1993; 115: 460–467.
98.
GendaEKonishiNHasegawaY, et al. A computer simulation study of normal and abnormal hip joint contact pressure. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg1995; 114: 202–206.
HenakCRAndersonAEWeissJA.Subject-specific analysis of joint contact mechanics: Application to the study of osteoarthritis and surgical planning. J Biomech Eng2013; 135: 1–26.
101.
DiceLR.Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology1945; 26: 297–302.
102.
SørensenT.A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity. Kong Dansk vidensk Selsk Biol Skr1948; 5: 1–34.
103.
BrandRA.Joint contact stress: a reasonable surrogate for biological processes?Iowa Orthop J2005; 25: 82–94.
104.
LuoZPNieburGLAnKN.Determination of the proximity tolerance for measurement of surface contact areas using a magnetic tracking device. J Biomech1996; 29: 367–372.
105.
LichtiDDChapmanMA.Constrained FEM self-calibration. Photogramm Eng Remote Sensing1997; 63: 1111–1119.
106.
GotoAMoritomoHMuraseT, et al. In vivo elbow biomechanical analysis during flexion: three-dimensional motion analysis using magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2004; 13: 441–447.
107.
Gondim TeixeiraPAFormeryASHossuG, et al. Evidence-based recommendations for musculoskeletal kinematic 4D-CT studies using wide area-detector scanners: a phantom study with cadaveric correlation. Eur Radiol2017; 27: 437–446.
108.
DeFrateLESunHGillTJ, et al. In vivo tibiofemoral contact analysis using 3D MRI-based knee models. J Biomech2004; 37: 1499–1504.
109.
AnderstWJTashmanS.The association between velocity of the center of closest proximity on subchondral bones and osteoarthritis progression. J Orthopaed Res2009; 27: 71–77.
110.
MenYTJiangYLChenL, et al. On mechanical mechanism of damage evolution in articular cartilage. Mater Sci Eng C2017; 78: 79–87.
111.
HunterDJGuermaziALoGH, et al. Evolution of semi-quantitative whole joint assessment of knee OA: MOAKS (MRI osteoarthritis knee score). Osteoarthr Cartil2011; 19: 990–1002.
112.
Van RossomSWesselingMVan AsscheD, et al. Topographical variation of human femoral articular cartilage thickness, t1rho and T2 relaxation times is related to local loading during walking. Cartilage2019; 10: 229–237.
113.
TengHLPedoiaVLinkTM, et al. Local associations between knee cartilage t1ρ and T2 relaxation times and patellofemoral joint stress during walking: A voxel-based relaxometry analysis. Knee2018; 25: 406–416.
114.
SharmaGBKuntzeGBeveridgeJE, et al. Characterization of tibiofemoral cartilage T2 mapping in the contact and non-contact regions during walking using dual fluoroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging. Osteoarthr Cartil2015; 23: A256–A257.
