Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42802206›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026

High variability in resistance to valgus deformation among knee braces indicated for medial collateral ligament injuries: a standardized bench-model biomechanical comparison.

Evmorfia Pechlivanidou, Monika Stacheter, Peter Wahl, Matthias Jacobi

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Evmorfia PechlivanidouDepartment of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece. pevmorfia@med.uoa.gr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0492-2550
Monika StacheterARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-5933-4097
Peter WahlARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8895-8621
Matthias JacobiOrthopädie Rosenberg, St Gallen, Switzerland. matthias.jacobi@orh.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2103-8721

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo quantify valgus deformation and per-load mechanical stiffness of commercially available knee braces indicated for medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries, and to evaluate whether mechanical performance is associated with material classification and qualitative stability assessment. MATERIALS AND

methodsNine knee braces identified through a national market survey were tested on a custom lower limb mechanical surrogate under progressive valgus loading at 5.7, 11.4, and 19.4 Nm. Angular deformation was measured using video-based motion tracking, and per-load brace stiffness (Nm/°) was computed at each load level.

resultsAt maximum applied torque (19.4 Nm), per-load stiffness ranged from 1.6 to 6.5 Nm/° across the nine devices - a fourfold difference between the stiffest and most compliant brace - with median valgus deformation of 8° (range 3-12°). In an exploratory, underpowered between-category comparison, rigid braces showed numerically higher stiffness than semi-rigid and soft devices (ε² = 0.34-0.45); this comparison is reported for hypothesis generation only. Qualitative ratings showed only moderate, inconsistent correlations with measured performance.

conclusionsCommercially available knee braces indicated for MCL injuries demonstrate highly variable mechanical resistance to valgus deformation under standardized bench conditions. The present sample was insufficient to determine whether material category accounts for this variability. These findings describe device-specific mechanical performance and do not constitute evidence for or against the clinical effectiveness of MCL bracing; they underscore the need for standardized biomechanical testing.

Indexed as

BracesKnee InjuriesMedial Collateral Ligament, KneeBiomechanical PhenomenaEquipment DesignHumansMaterials TestingJoint laxityMechanical stiffnessMedical device regulationOrthoses

Identifiers

PMID42802206
PMCPMC13616848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.