The Importance of Biomechanics in Osteoarthritis Rehabilitation
The challenge in treating OA lies in finding the right balance: too little movement leads to stiffness and atrophy, while excessive or misaligned loading aggravates joint degeneration. Traditional gym or therapy equipment often fails to respect joint axes, resulting in:
- Abnormal shear or compression forces on cartilage and subchondral bone
- Muscle imbalances and compensatory movement patterns
- Increased pain or limited progress in functional mobility
Biomechanically optimised equipment minimises these risks by guiding the joint through a physiological motion path and precisely controlling load distribution.
A study by Denner (1997) highlighted that controlled resistance exercise targeting isolated muscle groups significantly improves neuromuscular coordination and reduces pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. Similarly, Fehrmann et al. (2017) demonstrated that device-based training with the DAVID Spine Concept resulted in significant pain reduction and increased strength among patients with degenerative spine conditions. These findings also translate to the management of OA in peripheral joints.
How DAVID Integrates Biomechanics into Device Design
For more than four decades, DAVID Health Solutions has developed its rehabilitation systems based on an in-depth understanding of human biomechanics and clinical evidence. Each device, whether for the knee, hip, or spine, incorporates features that ensure optimal safety and effectiveness:
-
Anatomical Axis Alignment
All devices are designed to match the human joint’s natural pivot point. Misalignment can create harmful shear forces, but DAVID’s adjustable axis system ensures precise alignment for every individual. -
Adaptive Range of Motion (ROM)
The therapist can customise the movement range according to pain thresholds, flexibility, and stage of rehabilitation. This gradual progression supports mobility restoration without irritation. -
Physiological Resistance Curve
DAVID’s resistance profiles are engineered to mirror the muscle’s strength curve, lightest where the joint is weakest, and heaviest where it can safely handle more load. This reduces joint stress while maximising muscle activation. -
Stabilisation and Isolation
Proper stabilisation minimises unwanted compensations and ensures that the targeted muscle group, such as the quadriceps for knee OA- receives the full therapeutic benefit.
Clinical Outcomes: Evidence-Based Success
Numerous clinical studies have validated the effectiveness of DAVID’s biomechanically precise approach:
-
Taimela et al. (1996) found significant pain reduction and functional improvement in patients with chronic low back pain who used DAVID devices through controlled, progressive resistance training.
-
Fray & Holgate (2018) demonstrated that device-based, movement-controlled rehabilitation enhances both physical performance and confidence, reducing kinesiophobia in musculoskeletal patients.
-
Alperovitch-Najenson et al. (2020) confirmed measurable increases in strength and mobility with DAVID-based programs in older adults, supporting its role in joint preservation and fall prevention.
These findings reinforce that when movement respects biomechanics, it not only prevents further joint damage but also stimulates repair, improves proprioception, and rebuilds muscle balance, key factors in managing long-term osteoarthritis.
The Future of Osteoarthritis Care: Data-Driven Biomechanics
All DAVID systems are connected through the EVE Therapy Software, which records every repetition, range, and load parameter. This allows therapists to personalise exercise progression, monitor patient adherence, and visualise measurable outcomes.
The integration of biomechanics with digital intelligence marks a new era in OA rehabilitation, one where movement becomes measurable, personalised, and evidence-based.
References
- Denner, A. (1997). Muscle reconditioning of patients with chronic back pain: Principles and results of the DAVID concept. Journal of Musculoskeletal Research, 1(2), 85–92.
- Taimela, S., Kankaanpää, M., & Luoto, S. (1996). The effect of active rehabilitation on chronic low back pain and muscle function. Spine, 21(23), 2924–2931.
- Fehrmann, E., Meichtry, A., et al. (2017). Clinical outcomes after device-based exercise therapy for chronic low back pain: A retrospective cohort study. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 49(3), 212–219.
- Fray, M. E., & Holgate, R. (2018). The effect of a device-based exercise program on pain, fear of movement, and function in patients with musculoskeletal pain. Musculoskeletal Care, 16(3), 393–399.
- Alperovitch-Najenson, D., et al. (2020). The impact of structured resistance exercise on function and pain in older adults. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 15, 1545–1555.
Magyarország