Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 May 9.
Published in final edited form as: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992 Oct;74(9):1298–1312.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 8

The mean difference in values for strain across subjects (with the convention of strain for testing with a brace minus strain for testing without a brace) for anterior shear loading with the knee in 30 degrees of flexion for all seven braces. The differences were used to provide controlled comparisons of values for strain in each subject. A zero difference indicates no effect by the brace, a negative difference shows a protective strain-shielding by the brace, and a positive difference shows a deleterious increase in strain on the anterior cruciate ligament. An identical method was used for presentation of the data in Figures 9, 10, and 11. The 95 per cent confidence limits for mean differences between testing with and without a brace are displayed centered at the zero strain value for forty, 100, and 180-newton load levels. The observations for each individual knee-brace are described in Table II. 3D = 3D dynamic functional knee-brace (3D Orthopaedic), US = Lerman Multi-Lig II brace (United States Manufacturing), TN = Townsend brace (Townsend Industries), DJ = DonJoy 4-point Sport ACL brace (DonJoy), CT = C.Ti. brace with ACL cable system (Innovation Sports), BL = Bledsoe Sports Rehab brace (Medical Technology), and LH = Lenox Hill derotation brace (Lenox Hill Brace Shop).