This study describes the development of output devices for round window middle-ear. To overcome the problems of output devices that apply sound pressure directly to the round window, an acoustic bellows-type round window transducer was implemented by combining a small bellows, acoustic tube, and balanced armature driver.
The output characteristics of the proposed acoustic bellows-type round window transducer were confirmed through bench tests and distortion measurements. To compare the vibration transmission characteristics of the proposed transducer with those of sound pressure stimulation devices, an experiment was performed using four human temporal bones.
The average output magnitude of the acoustic bellows-type round window transducer was equivalent to sound pressure levels of 92, 96, and 108 dB for frequency ranges of <1, 1–2, and > 2 kHz, respectively. The results showed that the proposed transducer delivered vibration consistently without reducing the sound pressure level due to leakage, unlike the sound pressure stimulation device.
Therefore, the acoustic bellows-type round window transducer is a more stable and suitable output device for round window middle-ear implants than a sound pressure stimulation device. It is expected to overcome the limitations of sound pressure stimulation devices and to contribute to new technical solutions in the field of round window middle-ear implants development.
Cadaveric models are sometimes used to test the effect of manual techniques. We have not found any studies comparing the effect of tibiotarsal joint distraction on cadaveric models versus live models for clinical use. The aim was to compare the effect on tibiotarsal joint distraction movement when applying three force magnitudes of tibiotarsal axial traction technique force between a cadaveric model and volunteers. In addition, to compare the magnitude of force applied between the cadaveric model and volunteers. Finally, to assess the reliability of applying the same magnitude of force in three magnitudes of tibiotarsal axial traction force.
A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted. Sixty ankle joints were in open-packed position and three magnitudes of tibiotarsal axial traction technique force were applied. Tibiotarsal joint distraction movement was measured with ultrasound.
No differences were found in applied force or tibiotarsal joint distraction between volunteers and cadavers in each magnitude of force (p > 0.05). The application of the technique showed moderate reliability for detecting low forces in both models. For medium and high force, it showed good reliability in the in vitro model and excellent reliability in the live model.
The amount of distraction produced in the tibiotarsal joint was similar in volunteers and cadavers. The cadaveric model is a valid model for testing and investigating orthopaedic manual therapy techniques. The force applied was similar in the two models. Medium and high force detection showed good reliability, while low force showed moderate.
Stemless shoulder arthroplasty offers several advantages, such as preserving bone stock and reducing periprosthetic fracture risk. However, implant motion can deter osteointegration and increase bone resorption, where micromotion less than 0.150 mm is crucial for bony ingrowth and vital to the success of the implant. The interaction between the implant and the metaphyseal bone and its effects on stability remains unclear. Therefore, this cadaveric study aims to assess the immediate stability of two stemless prostheses in low bone density specimens.
Twenty cadaveric shoulders were used to compare the stability of two stemless shoulder implants by Zimmer-Biomet (model A) and Exactech (model B), subjected to loads of 220 N, 520 N, and 820 N to assess strain and micromotion.
Micromotion at 220 N load was 0.061 ± 0.080 mm and 0.053 ± 0.050 mm, and at 520 N load, 0.279 ± 0.37 mm and 0.311 ± 0.35 mm for models A and B, respectively. The estimated mean force required to achieve a 150 μm micromotion was 356 ± 116 N and 315 ± 61 N for models A and B, respectively. Motion analysis revealed distinct movement patterns for each implant, with model B demonstrating better force distribution on the bone despite no significance.
Forces over 520 N (high postoperative rehabilitation force) could hinder bone integration with prostheses due to excessive micromotion. Conversely, forces around 220 N (preconditioning loading force) are considered safe for prosthesis stability even with low bone density. These insights may caution against using stemless implants when bone density is low, and help guide clinical decisions on the duration of rehabilitation and sling use after stemless arthroplasty.