Validates a new biomechanics device for measuring joint stiffness in preclinical models, suggesting enhanced comparability in research.
Aims Reliable assessment of joint stiffness is essential for studying arthrofibrosis in preclinical animal models. This study presents a new dedicated biomechanics device for measuring knee stiffness in mouse, rat, and rabbit models of arthrofibrosis, with the aim of validating its performance and comparing it to a previously validated device. Methods The new system integrates a torque load cell, stepper motor, and absolute encoder in a through-hole, unified configuration for precise continuous torque-angle measurement, with custom limb brackets ensuring species-specific alignment at the joint’s centre of rotation. To validate this device and compare it to a previously validated device, arthrofibrosis was induced using established models of extra-articular immobilization in mice and intra-articular violation with immobilization in rats and rabbits, followed by defined remobilization periods. Torque-angle curves were recorded ex vivo across species-specific torque ranges, and measurement variability between the new and a previous validated device was statistically compared using Brown-Forsythe’s test. Results The onset of hyperextension in contralateral limbs occurred at mean angles of 152.4° (mice), 154.4° (rats), and 152.8° (rabbits), and at maximum torque, mean flexion angles were 79.2°, 87.3°, and 140.5°, respectively. No significant differences in measurement variability were observed between devices across all species. Conclusion These findings demonstrate that our new device provides reproducible torque-angle data while maintaining the statistical robustness of the previous device and offering improved mechanical design and operational standardization. By enabling standardized, cross-species joint stiffness quantification, this platform improves cross-study comparability and strengthens the translational reliability of preclinical arthrofibrosis research. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2026;15(6):716–725.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carstens et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: