Abstract
State-of-the-art knee braces use a polycentric mechanism with a predefined locus of the instantaneous center of rotation (centrode) and most exoskeleton devices use a knee mechanism with a single axis of rotation. However, human knees do not share a common centrode nor do they have a single axis. This leads to misalignment between the assistive device's joint axis and the user's knee axis, resulting in device migration and interaction forces, which can lead to sores, pain, and abandonment of the device over time. There has been some research into self-aligning knee mechanisms; however, there is a lack of consensus on the benefit of these mechanisms. There is no research that looked purely at the impact of the knee mechanisms, either. In this article, we compare three different knee brace mechanisms: single axis (SA), polycentric with predefined centrode (PPC), and polycentric with a self-aligning center of rotation (PSC). We designed and conducted an experiment to evaluate different joint mechanisms on device migration and interaction forces. Brace material, weight, size, cuff design, fitment location, and tightness were consistent across trials, making the knee joint mechanism the sole variable. The brace mechanisms had no significant effect on walking kinematics or kinetics. However, the PPC brace had greater interaction forces on the top brace strap than the SA and PSC. The PSC and SA had significantly lower interaction forces on the bottom strap compared to the PPC brace. The PSC had significantly less migration than both the SA and PPC braces. These results show that a PPC mechanism may not be beneficial for a wide range of users. This also shows that the PSC mechanisms may improve mechanism alignment and lessen device migration.