Proximal femur fractures commonly occur between the head of the femur and the femoral shaft. As the third most common injury encountered in orthopedic clinics, these fractures are typically treated with medical implants creating internal stabilization of the bone. Over 100 different implants are available for this application. Although the optimal choice for the implants is still controversial, traditional devices which include a single cylindrical screw, such as SHS (Sliding Hip Screw) and IMHS – CP (Intramedullary Hip Screw, Clinically Proven), are widely used to repair the bone fracture. However, the application of the single screw device still suffers technical problems. The head of the femur has the potential to rotate about the screw and the fracture surfaces have potential to slide over each other. In addition, force relaxation can occur, leading to inadequate contact between the fracture surfaces. To attack these problems and prevent possible complications, a new device has been developed. The new device consists of one long screw interlocked with one short screw, creating a cross-sectional figure-eight pattern and offering an integrated, interlocking screw option. The objective of the current study is to compare biomechanical characteristics within the bone caused by the new double screw device verses the traditional single screw device. Experiments were preformed to compare the torsional stiffness of the two devices. 2D and 3D finite element analysis methods were carried out to obtain macroscopic and microscopic responses of each device’s interaction with the fractured bone. The modeled results show a significant difference between the two geometries. The single screw geometry has higher maximum total deformation, equivalent strain, equivalent von Mises stress, and maximum principle stress. The improved rotational stability of the new double screw device may reduce the complication rate of instability of the fracture fragments.
Skip Nav Destination
ASME 2010 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition
November 12–18, 2010
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Conference Sponsors:
- ASME
ISBN:
978-0-7918-4426-7
PROCEEDINGS PAPER
Single Screw vs. Double Screw Device for Use in Treating Femoral Bone Fractures
J. E. Ondrake,
J. E. Ondrake
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
Search for other works by this author on:
K. C. Lifer,
K. C. Lifer
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
Search for other works by this author on:
S. P. Haman,
S. P. Haman
Orthopaedic Institute of Ohio, Lima, OH
Search for other works by this author on:
J. E. Marquart,
J. E. Marquart
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
Search for other works by this author on:
Hui Shen
Hui Shen
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
Search for other works by this author on:
J. E. Ondrake
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
K. C. Lifer
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
S. P. Haman
Orthopaedic Institute of Ohio, Lima, OH
J. E. Marquart
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
Hui Shen
Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH
Paper No:
IMECE2010-38676, pp. 365-372; 8 pages
Published Online:
April 30, 2012
Citation
Ondrake, JE, Lifer, KC, Haman, SP, Marquart, JE, & Shen, H. "Single Screw vs. Double Screw Device for Use in Treating Femoral Bone Fractures." Proceedings of the ASME 2010 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. Volume 2: Biomedical and Biotechnology Engineering. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. November 12–18, 2010. pp. 365-372. ASME. https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2010-38676
Download citation file:
10
Views
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Articles
Finite Element Prediction of Proximal Femoral Fracture Patterns Under Different Loads
J Biomech Eng (February,2005)
Significance of nonlinearity consideration in finite element analysis for preclinical strength assessment of extramedullary femur plates
ASME J of Medical Diagnostics (January,0001)
Related Chapters
Introduction and Definitions
Handbook on Stiffness & Damping in Mechanical Design
Simple Structural Elements
Introduction to Plastics Engineering
Chapter 12 | Nanoscale Technologies for Bone Grafting
Bone Graft Substitutes and Bone Regenerative Engineering